Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2014
https://archive.org/details/remainsliteraryt02thir_0
REMAINS
LITERARY AND THEOLOGICAL
OF
CONNOP THIRLWALL
LATE LORD BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S
<
REMAINS
LITERARY AND, THEOLOGICAL
/of
CONNOP THIRLWALL
LATE LORD BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S
EDITED
By J. J. STEWART PEROWNE, D.D.
HONORARY CHAPLAIN TO THE QUEEN; CANON OF LLANDAFF ; AND HULSEAN
PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY, CAMBRIDGE
VOL. II.— CHARGES
Delivered between the Years 1863 and 1872
LONDON
DALDY, ISBISTER & CO.
56, LUDGATE HILL
1877
»
LONDON :
PRINTED BY VIRTUK AND CO., LIMITED
CITY ROAD.
^^^^^^
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
vol. n.
PAGE
Eighth Charge, 1863. Essays and Reviews. — Writings op the Bishop
of Natal 1
Ninth Charge, 1866. State of the Diocese. — National Education,
The Revised Code. — Diocesan Synods. — Final Court of Appeal. —
Ritualism . . • 91
Tenth Charge, 1869. Disestablishment of the Irish Church. — Ritu-
alism.— The Eucharistic Controversy. — The Vatican Council . . 203
Eleventh Charge, 1872. The Vatican Council. — Dissensions in the
Church of England. — The Athanasian Creed. — The Education
Act of 1870 290
VIII.
A CHARGE
Delivered October, 1863.
ESSAYS AND REVIEWS. WRITINGS OF THE BISHOP OF NATAL.
My Reverend Brethren,
In what might once be considered as ordinary times,
passing events, of local or temporary interest, afforded but rare
and scanty topics for a Bishop's charge : and it might often
happen that it was entirely occupied with some general observa-
tions on the duties of the clergy, and with exhortations, which
might be always edifying, but not more so at one time or place
than another. The condition of the Church on the whole was
apparently stationary ; its movement, if any, too slow to be
perceived by contemporary spectators. It was much if the
universal stillness was now and then broken by an Act of Parlia-
ment, affecting some ecclesiastical interest, which might need
explanation, or invite discussion, or by some abuse hurtful to the
Church which appeared to call for the interposition of the Legis-
lature. Very different has been the state of things since I was
charged with the administration of this diocese. During the
whole of this period the Church has been more or less threatened
from without, and agitated within. I need hardly remind you of
the controversies which arose in the last generation, and have been
carried on uninterruptedly to the present day, with regard to the
Sacraments, and the whole range of theological questions con-
nected with them. The gravity and practical importance of these
VOL. II. B
2
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
disputes may be estimated, not only from the extent of the litera-
ture which has grown out of them, or from the heat with which
opposite views have been maintained, but, partly, from the number
of secessions from the Church, which have taken place in opposite
directions, of persons who carried their views on either side to an
extreme inconsistent with her formularies, and partly from the
various efforts which have been made to obtain such a modification
of those formularies, as may enable such of her ministers as are
dissatisfied with them to feel themselves more at their ease within
her pale.
Fitness of It always seemed to me that such questions claimed a
tor treating prominent, indeed the foremost, place among those
prominent
questions. which might be fitly treated on such an occasion as the
solemn periodical meeting between a Bishop and his clergy ; and
that a survey of them taken from the point of view best suited to
the character of the episcopal office, and in a spirit befitting the
occasion, might serve a practical purpose ; one, perhaps, more
important than any which only concerns the temporal prospects
of the Church. If, as was pretty sure to be the case, the result of
a calm examination, conducted with a single eye to truth and
charity, was to show that the theological differences which parted
the contending schools had been greatly exaggerated by party
zeal, and that there was ample room for both within the common
pale, it might tend to allay some bitter feelings, to revive mutual
confidence and good will, and to combine energies which would
have wasted themselves in barren strife, for united efforts in the
cause of Christ. And this is an object which, however far beyond
the power of any one man to attain, is certainly worthy of all the
pains that can be spent upon it.
„ . Of late years the position of the Church, as an insti-
Questions •> 1 '
theCtc"hurch tution connected with the State, has undergone a change
externally. ^ich }s certainly of no light significance, though its ulti-
mate consequences lie beyond the range of our view. The aggression
of the party which aims at dissolving that connexion has been more
systematically organized, and carried on with more concert and
vigour than in former times. A society has been formed for the
CHARGES.
purpose of urging and guiding its movements, on every point
where the Church seems most open to attack. By way of prepara-
tion for greater things, this society has been striving more
especially to effect the abolition of church-rates, and in the mean
while, as far as possible, to prevent them from being levied, even
where they have been willingly granted ; and to deprive the
Church of her hold even on schools endowed by members of her
own communion, and most clearly designed by them to enjoy the
benefit of her teaching. In these and other enterprises directed
to the same object, the society has achieved but a very moderate
degree of success, and has rather thwarted its own aims by a
premature disclosure of its ulterior views. But this aggressive
organization has called forth a counteractive movement of defence
on the part of the Church, set on foot and conducted chiefly by
laymen, which has already exerted a very wholesome influence,
and promises to serve, not only for the protection of her legiti-
mate interests, but for the extension and increased efficiency of her
work.
But while on this side, though there are motives enough for con-
stant watchfulness and redoubled activity, there has been
no ground for alarm, it has befallen us to witness the Intemally-
upgrowth of questions within the Church, not only of a different
kind, but of a different order, from those to which I was just now
pointing, questions stretching very far toward the foundations of
the Christian faith. How widely they are parted from those
which had previously occupied the minds of churchmen may be
gathered from several signs. While the interest roused by the
previous controversies was confined to a comparatively narrow
circle, and the points on which they turned were regarded by the
bulk even of our own people rather as matters of ecclesiastical
learning than of common practical concern, — except when they
happened to be forced on public attention by some ill-judged
introduction of ritual innovations, — the recently promulged
opinions have found their way among all classes of the community,
and have been felt by all to involve very grave consequences ;
and, within the circle in which the earlier controversies were
b 2
4
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
waged, the contending parties have suspended the old conflict to
unite their forces against a movement which seems to threaten all
that each holds most dear. Nor can any of those who stand out-
side the Church, and are even most hostile to many of her
distinguishing doctrines and institutions, if they only hold her
fundamental creed, look on this new struggle as unconcerned
spectators. They are aware that they are no less interested in the
issue.
T . . . When men have been startled by a new phenomenon,
Inquiry into •> r
the °neoiogT ^ *s natural that they should inquire after its cause, and so
of the day. attempts have not been wanting to trace the neology of our
day to its source. Nor is this to be regarded as a question which
can serve only to satisfy a vain curiosity. It has its practical use.
For the nature of a thing can hardly be fully understood without
some insight into its origin ; and there can be no right judgment
on its quality which is not grounded on a clear view of its nature.
But the subject opens large room for conjectures, which it is
equally hard to prove and to refute. One readily presented itself
with much show of likelihood. It was natural to suppose that
there was some connexion between the present and the immediate
past ; between the new opinions and the two great parties which
had been so long striving for ascendancy in the Church.
And to some it appeared that the newly raised sceptical spirit was
no more than the inevitable effect of a recoil which was sure to
come, sooner or later, from the excess to which one of them had
pushed its distinguishing tenets. "When the claims of human
authority have been advanced beyond their due limits, it would
not be surprising that they should provoke a reaction, which is
carried over bounds on the opposite side. This explanation might
not be altogether groundless, and yet quite inadequate ; and there
may be as good reason for ascribing the result to a sequence
rather than to a reaction, and for regarding the New as the
offspring of the Old. For where the witness, either of the Church
or of the individual consciousness, has been allowed practically
to supersede that of Holy Writ, and has been treated as the
supreme authority, the value of the historical record must more or
CHARGES.
5
less sink in comparison with both, and so may easily come to be
positively disparaged. We know, in fact, that such was the effect
of the opposite exaggerations of the Church of Rome on the one
hand, and of the Reformation movement on the other. The
Church of the Papacy has uniformly either forbidden or dis-
couraged the reading of Scripture, as not only needless and
useless, but dangerous for the mass of the laity. The place which
she assigns to the Bible is subordinate to the living oracle of her
visible Head. In her view the written Word borrows its whole
title to belief from her sanction ; and she would eagerly endorse
the sentiment which has lately been expressed by a Bishop of our
Church, that " if the whole Bible was removed," the Christian
faith would still stand fast ; that is, on that Rock on which she
conceives it to have been founded by the Lord Himself, and which
she sees in the succession of His earthly Vicegerents. Among the
sects which sprang out of the Reformation, and marred and dis-
honoured it by their narrow and fierce fanaticism, there were
several which, both in theory and practice, adopted the same
sentiment, only in a widely different sense, subordinating the
Record of Revelation to the manifestation of the light which
shines in every man's breast, and bidding each seek truth from
the dictates of his own inward oracle. Such a view is evidently
no less adverse to the supremacy of Scripture than to the authority
of the Church.
But yet, indisputable and worthy of note as is this ideal affinity
between modes of thinking, which outwardly have so little in
common, it would be unsafe to treat it as sufficient proof of a
historical connexion ; and I am unable to find any other. I am
not aware of any more special grounds of a personal kind, which
warrant such a supposition ; and I do not believe that any dis-
covery that could be made in this direction would repay the
trouble of the search. The real state of the case seems to be
disclosed plainly enough by the writings which have suggested
the question. They exhibit opinions which had been long «Essaysand
floating in the public mind ; some as old as the earliest eviews-
attacks on the Christian faith, revived in the last century by our
6
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
own deistical writers, since then reproduced in various forms ; in
a few points perhaps of foreign origin, but on the whole of native
growth. No one who has reflected on the character and ten-
dencies of modern European society, especially of our own, can
be at any loss to account for the fact that such opinions should
find easy, ready, even eager acceptance among many in our day.
It is a natural consequence of the increased stimulus which has
been given to physical studies, not only by the progress of dis-
covery, and the craving for knowledge thus continually sharpened
by that which feeds it, but by the wants and desires of our
animal nature, to which it ministers, and which in our fast-
growing population are constantly multiplying their demands
with more clamorous importunity. I am only pointing to an
unquestionable fact, without the remotest intention of disparag-
ing the value and dignity of physical science, or the slightest
wish that it should be less actively cultivated, or that its well-
ascertained results should be less widely diffused, least of all in
the belief that they are or can be in themselves adverse to
religious truth ; they may, nevertheless, by the excitement of too
absorbing an interest, tend to create a disposition of mind gene-
rally unfavourable to its influence.*
* Some remarkable words connected with this subject occur in a letter of Prince
Metternich to A. v. Humboldt, which is printed in Humboldt's " Briefe an Varnhagen
von Ense," p. 219 : " Le faux mene au faux, comme le vrai conduit au vrai. Aussi
longtemps que l'esprit s'est maintenu dans le faux, dans la sphere la plus elevee que
1'esprit de Thcmme puisse atteindre, les consequences de ce triste etat ont du reagir
dans toutes les directions morales, intellectuelles, et sociales, et opposer a leur
developpement dans la droite voie, un obstacle insurmontable. La bonne nouvelle une
fois annoneee, la position a du changer. Ce n'eat pas en divinisant les effets, que ceux-
ci oni pu etre suivis dams les voies de la verite ; leur recherche est restee circonscrite
dans la speculation abstraite des philosophes et dans la verve des poetes. La cause
une fois mise a couvert, les eosiirs se sont mis en repos et les esprits se sont ouverts.
Ceux-ci sont longtemps encore restes enveloppes dans les brouillards de la sceptique
paienne, quand enfin la philosophic scolastique a ete debordee par la science
experimentale. Trouvez-vous mon raisonnement juste ? Si vous le trouvez, je ne suis
pas en doute que vous ne partagiez ma crainte, que les progres scientifiques veritables
courent le risque d'etre arretes par des esprits trop ambitieux, qui veulent remonter
des effets a la cause, et qui trouvant la route coupee par les limites infranchissables que
L)ieu a posees k 1' intelligence humaine, ne pouyant avancer, se replient sur eux-memes
et retournont a la stupidite du paganisme en cherchant la cause dans les effets." The
italics are Mettcrnich's. Humboldt describes it as "einen sehr merkwiirdigen Brief,"
" der halb theologisch endigt, voll Geist und Schwung der Rede, mit ein weuig Furcht
CHARGES.
7
One thing is certain. It was not either the novelty of the opinions
themselves, or the originality of the arguments by which Public
they were maintained, that attracted public attention attracted.
not by the
to the writing's of which I am about to speak, lhe writings,
° , r but by the
really new feature in the aspect which they were pre- j£^jacter of
6ented, was the character of the authors. It was just authors-
because the opinions were for the most part by no means new, but
familiar to persons conversant with such subjects in the works of
writers who, as holding such opinions, had deemed themselves,
and been regarded by others, as hostile to Christianity, that they
produced so startling an effect when they were announced by
ministers of Christ. For the writers did not belong to a religious
body which, while claiming the name of Christian, repudiates all
theological formularies, and imposes no restriction on its ministers,
unless it be that they must not preach any very positive doctrine.
They were ministers of a Church which aims at a definite teaching,
and exacts conformity to that teaching from those whom she admits
into her ministry. Nor were they among the obscure members of
their order, whose personal character could add no weight to their
opinions. They were all men of literary eminence, some filling
very important places in the rearing of the rising generation.
And if it might be supposed that scholastic pursuits, however
favourable to deep research and comprehensive views, might deaden
their sympathy with the feelings and needs of ordinary Christians,
and might thus lead them to overlook some very important
elements even of their own learned speculations, yet this could only
be the case with some. There were others of the number who were
engaged in pastoral duties, which brought them into daily contact
with the practical problems of the Christian life. Such a combina-
tion of talents and opportunities might have been expected to yield
two great advantages. On the one hand, a very clear consciousness,
not only of the precise import of their statements, but of the per-
haps remote, yet logically inevitable consequences which flow from
vor dem Pantheismus." More exactly, it was a relapse into Paganism which
Metternich thought he saw reason to apprehend, from a certain direction of scientific
pursuits.
8
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
them, so that, when such consequences were not designed, the
utmost care should be taken to guard the premisses from the
appearance of involving them. And on the other hand, it was to
have been hoped that there would have been shown, in the hand-
ling of religious subjects, however free, a certain tenderness for
beliefs which, in the minds of common Christians, are interwined
with the holiest feelings of their hearts, and that, if it was neces-
sary for the object in view to make a separation between them, it
should be done so as to inflict the smallest possible amount of
pain. One thing at least might have been thought to have been
effectually secured, that no one in whom the characters of the
academic teacher and the pastor of souls happened to meet,
would, when treating such subjects, express himself so that an
educated layman, called upon to give the closest attention
to his words, should find it a difficult task to ascertain their
meaning, and should be forced to " doubt whether, if the author
had studied to express his sentiments with ambiguity, he could
have been more successful:"* but above all, that no one,
occupying that twofold position, would so far forget what was
due to both, as to indulge in a tone of scornful bitterness
against those of his brethren in the ministry who held a belief
common to the vast majority of their own flocks, as well as
of all Christians throughout the world, and in all ages of the
Church, t
Form and But even if these expectations had been fulfilled,
conditions of
publication, there would have remained the very great fact, that
opinions generally thought contradictory to the principles of the
Christian faith, were proclaimed in a work proceeding from
eminent divines, ministers of the Church of England. Here,
however, we cannot avoid noticing the peculiar form of the
* Dr. Lushingtou's Judgment in the case of the Bishop of Salisbury v. Williams,
p. 18.
t On this point the judgment of the Edinburgh Reviewer (No. CCXXX., p. 479)
will not be suspected of partiality : " The flippant and contemptuous tone of the
reviewer often amounts to a direct breach of the compact with which the volume opens,
that the subjects therein touched should be handled 'in a becoming spirit.' Any
thing more 'unbecoming' than some of Dr. Williams's remarks we never have read
in writings professing to be written seriously."
CHARGES.
9
publication, as a collection of the independent contributions of
different authors, writing wholly without concert with one another.
It would indeed be unjust and absurd to represent them as having
consciously co-operated with one another for any definite object,
or as in any way antecedently pledged to one another's views ;
and the most entire credit was due to them, when they disclaimed
such a joint responsibility and concert.* But at least this dis-
claimer, whether it was from the hand of one of their number, or
from one who was authorised to speak in their name, must be con-
sidered as common to all. And what it clearly implied was, that,
however each might reserve his private judgment as to any
doctrine advanced by any of the rest, there was nothing in the
whole that appeared to any of them inconsistent with that which,
as clergymen of the Church of England, they were bound to
maintain.! If the fact had been otherwise, there would have
been a breach of " compact," of which those who dissented would
have had a right to complain. Not only was no such complaint
heard at the proper time, immediately after the publication, when
it could not have been liable to misconstruction, but as far as
silence was broken by any of them, it was in language signifying
a more than contented acquiescence in every part of the whole
teaching. And this was really the only point with which the
Church had any concern. If the opinions, however How far the
Church was
questionable, did not go beyond the latitude allowed by implicated,
her to her ministers, then their truth or falsehood was of little
* This, however, may depend on the precise meaning of the word " concert." Mr.
Kennard, who, writing the history of the book as a warm admirer and thorough-going
advocate, is likely to have been well informed, states (" Essays and Reviews, their
Origin, History, &c, " p. 26) : " They determined to vindicate for the clergy practi-
cally the right of treating openly, in language addressed to the people generally,
questions concerning prophecy, miracles, &c. They associated at the same time a
layman with them in the undertaking." It is so far from unusual to speak of persons
who are "associated in an undertaking " as acting in "concert," that if, while con-
scious of the " association," they were to deny the " concert," they would hardly bo
thought to be making a perfectly fair use of language. But whether such a concert
may be properly termed a " conspiracy " must depend on the nature of the object.
t Here the authority of the Edinburgh Reviewer cannot be disputed : " Every
one of them by lending his name to the book does beyond doubt assert that, however
much he may differ from the views contained in any other Essay than his own, he yet
vindicates the lawfulness of holding those views within the English Church." 1'. 489.
LO
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
importance, except as it might affect the reputation of the authors.
But the question, whether these opinions were or were not con-
sistent with her doctrines, was one on which depended something
far more important than the reputation of any individual, how-
ever eminent in station, learning, and ability ; that is, the
character and position of the Church itself, as a branch of the
universal Church of Christ. This was a question which inte-
rested every one of her members, the more deeply in propor-
tion to the breadth of the doctrines propounded, and the close-
ness of their connexion with the foundations of the Christian
faith. And to this extent it does appear to me that each of the
clerical contributors did incur a responsibility, which he could
not shift from himself, for opinions which he did not expressly
disavow.
General There was yet another point of view in which, not-
among^he withstanding the divided authorship, the book might,
be not improperly treated as if it had been the produc-
tion of a single mind. Though consisting of a number of distinct
essays on various subjects, it might exhibit a close affinity of
thought and feeling, and strong indications of general unanimity
among the writers. The different parts might appear to fit into
one another, as if they had come from the same hand. There
might be everywhere signs of a common drift and tendency, just
as if all had been arranged with a view to one object : and a
total absence, not only of any express contradiction, but of any-
thing to suggest the suspicion of a divergency of views, among the
contributors. How far it presents the appearance of such har-
mony, must depend on the judgment we may form of its contents.*
But before I proceed to consider what appears to me most impor-
tant and characteristic in them, I think it may not be useless
to make a few remarks on the public history of the book. Its
private history will probably long remain a secret confined to a few.
rubiic his- It was not until the work had passed throug-h several
tory of the . 1 °
book. editions, and had attained a celebrity which far exceeded
* If indeed Mr. Kennavd's statement, cited in a previous note, is well founded, there
would be no need ol an appeal to internal evidence on this head.
CHARGES.
11
the hopes of the authors, and perhaps even the wishes of some
among them, and not until it had experienced a great amount of
adverse criticism, which called forth neither defence nor explana-
tion, that the attention of the episcopate was formally drawn to it
by a memorial signed by a large body of the clergy. This step
has been treated as a pitiable mistake on the part of the memo-
rialists. But the conduct of the Bishops, who concurred Aetion of
in a general censure of the work, was visited with still p^con-0"
severer condemnation. They were charged with abusing demned-
their position, to encourage a foolish and groundless outcry, and
aggravate a senseless panic, and with attempting to stifle inquiry,
and to restrain the rightful freedom of the clergy.* It was thought
by some that they were not at liberty to express an opinion on the
work, unless they at the same time entered into a discussion of its
contents, and distinguished the various degrees in which their
censure applied to the several contributors, t To some it appeared
deplorable that they should censure the opinions of others, without
at the same time avowing their own continued adherence to the
doctrines of the Church. t But perhaps no complaint was more
popular and oftener repeated, than that they had not refuted before
they condemned.
It is evident that the justice of all these complaints must
depend on the character of the work, and that each contains a
tacit assumption which may be well or ill founded. Defenee of
It is on this account only that I now advert to them. that aetum'
If the questions raised in the work were of trifling moment,
though through some unfortunate accident they had produced
much temporary excitement, then it would have been the duty of
the chief pastors of the Church to exert their influence for the
purpose of allaying that excitement, and to enlighten those who.
had been blindly agitated by an imaginary danger. If again the
opinions expressed in the work kept within the latitude which
might be rightfully claimed by ministers of our Church, then,
* Edinburgh Review u. s. and Mr. Kennard passim,
t Edinburgh Review, p. 469.
I Tracts for Priests and people. " Religio Laici," p. 9.
12
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
however they might be opposed to those both of a great majority
of the clergy, and of the whole episcopate, it would have been
unfair to condemn them as repugnant to the doctrines of the
Church, or inconsistent with the obligations of her ministers. But
if such a repugnance did exist, then to require that, before any
censure was pronounced, the opinions condemned should be dis-
proved, would clearly involve consequences which can hardly have
been generally contemplated by those who called for a previous
refutation. By refutation they must have meant something more
than an argument which, however strong in the judgment of the
party which employs it, leaves the opponent unconvinced : and,
if he is to be the judge of its cogency, it would follow that any
minister of the Church may deny every one of her doctrines, and
yet be allowed to remain in her ministry until he admits his error.
It seems indeed as if there were persons who saw no absurdity in
this extent of licence, or would only restrict it in the actual per-
formance of sacred functions. But unless this be allowed, it is
evident that in the case we are now considering, the question
whether the doctrine propounded is true or false, though
undoubtedly first in importance, is not that which has to be first
discussed with a view to any practical result. For in general
such a discussion would be only a renewal of an old and endless
controversy. In the order of time the first question must be,
whether the doctrine is in harmony with the teaching of the
Church. This, which is the point of immediately practical
concern, is also that which may in general be most easily ascer-
This was the sum and substance of the censure pr-o-
tained.
Complaints
Elsiwps*he nounced on the book. It was a declaration that, in the
opinion of the Bishops, its contents were repugnant to
the doctrine of the Church. It has been made matter of com-
plaint that this censure was expressed in terms which were likely
to inflict needless pain on the authors ; and it has been invidiously
described as demanding the removal of five of the number from
their positions in the Church.* It was even thought that, if the
" Edinburgh Re\ie\v u. s., p. 169. Further on, in the warmth of his peroration.
CHARGES.
13
work had been less severely condemned, some of them might
have felt themselves at liberty to declare their dissent from the
extreme opinions avowed by others ; but that, after so many
voices had been raised against them, especially from the high
places of the Church, a sense of honour prevented them from
entering into any explanations, that might indicate a disapproval
of any portion of the book. I have already pointed out, that
there was an earlier occasion, when this might have been done
without any risk of misconstruction. And highly as we may
respect such a point of honour, we may doubt whether in this
case it was consistent with a higher law of duty, and the dictates
of Christian charity ; and whether the more sacred obligation was
that which they owed to a few persons with whom they had
become accidentally associated in a literary undertaking, or that
under which they lay toward the great body of their brethren
and the Church at large. But as to the language of the censure,
whatever pains might have been taken to soften it, it could not
without dissimulation have left any uncertainty on the main
point : that clergymen had published doctrines opposed to those
of their Church, and this not on any nice and doubtful questions,
in which much subtlety was needed to discern the line which
separates orthodoxy from error,* but on such as lay at the root of
all revealed religion.
the Reviewer does not scruple to charge the Bishops with the " design of terrifying
or driving out of the Church those whom they themselves confess to be among its
chief ornaments."
* The main drift of the apology in the Edinburgh Review is to show that the
public had been entirely mistaken in its notion of the work, and that, with a possible
immaterial exception or two, it had only freely handled questions on which a great
latitude of opinion had always been allowed, and exercised by many eminent divines
of our Church. This afforded the Reviewer the additional advantage of enabling him,
while defending his friends, to retaliate on some of those who had joined in the
censure, as having " published opinions exactly coinciding with those which they
condemned;" and as thus aggravating the offence of an unjust persecution by a
shameful inconsistency. The justice of this charge depended on the assumption, that
the censure which they had pronounced on the book was levelled at those opinions.
This however was a mere surmise, which would have been purely arbitrary, even if
it had happened not to be, as it was, certainly unfounded ; and it is not easy to recon-
cile it with the Reviewer's own complaint, that the censure "abstained from all
distinct specifications of offence." He himjelf owns that, according to the sense in
which it has been almost universally understood, one of the Essays appears to him
14
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
It is worthy of note, that the call for refutation was raised hy
those who also most strongly deprecated any resort to judicial
Refutation proceedings against the persons who were charged with
by those unsound doctrine. In this I think they were quite
most . t
adverse to consistent. If a minister of the Church has a moral
judicial pro-
ceedings, right, while he continues to exercise his ministry, to
impugn her most fundamental doctrines, until he has been
convinced of their truth, it would be unjust to invoke the aid of
the law to convict him of that which would then be a mere
technical offence. But it seems to me not quite so consistent,
that the persons who called for refutation, should also have
condemned the proceedings which were instituted in Convocation
for the purpose of determining the theological character of the
book. But those who were most strongly convinced that this
character was essentially at variance with the fundamental teach-
ing of the Church, might be most inclined to doubt whether that
question could be fairly tried in a Court of Justice. And
experience has shown how ill the forms of penal judicature are
adapted to that end, and this just on account of what constitutes
their highest excellence. In a criminal prosecution, it is the duty
of the judge to require the most rigorous proof of the charge : to
interpret ambiguous language in the sense most favourable to the
writer : to refuse to listen to any accusation of merely constructive
to have transcended the limits of devout belief." He does not indeed say, but much
less does he deny, that what transcends those limits must also overstep the range of
legitimate freedom within the pale of the English Church. Yet, on his own con-
struction of the joint disclaimer, all the other Essayists meant to " vindicate the
lawfulness of holding those views within the English Church;" or at least have
contentedly allowed the world to believe that they do so. The other admitted
exceptions are represented as trifling, because contained in " a few words." Yet four
monosyllables have sufficed for an important proposition, which it would be difficult
to bring within the limits of devout belief (Ps. liii. 1). In substance, the Reviewer
perfectly agrees with the " Episcopal Manifesto," which he brands as " the counter-
part of the Papal excommunication levelled against Italian freedom." The chief
difference is, that the admissions of an advocate are the most conclusive evidence, and
the censure of a friend the most likely to be fully deserved, though as mild in form
as the nature of the case will permit.
It is only a noble and generous spirit that will ever make too great a sacrifice to
friendship; yet that is too great which is made at the cost of justice. A moralist
who enjoyed a high reputation even before he was thought to be inspired, laid down
the rule : nulla est excusatio peccati, si amici causa peccaveris.
CHARGES.
15
heresy : to shut his eyes to the spirit and tendency of a work,
however apparent, unless they are embodied in some distinct and
tangible proposition. I can never lament that rules based on the
first principles of right should have been strictly observed, though
the effect might seem in some instances a failure of substantial
justice. I cannot regard it as an unmitigated evil, that the
decision of questions involving abstruse points of Divinity, should
be committed to a layman, with no guide but his natural good
sense for the interpretation of language, the full import and
bearing of which could be correctly appreciated by none but an
expert theologian. "When civil rights are at stake, there can
hardly be too great a jealousy of professional bias or learned
refinements. It may happen that one man suffers a severe
penalty through his incapacity clearly to express a right mean-
ing, while another escapes through the studied ambiguity with
which he insinuates a wrong one. The former may be the
greater evil of the two ; but neither could lead me to desire a
change by which the trial of a criminal prosecution for matters of
religious opinion, should be taken out of lay hands.
Happily, just on this account, the character of the Church as
a religious communion can never be compromised by The charac_
such a decision, and it is only through a vulgar error, Church can-
,.. 1*1 • f» 1 1 n°t De com"
or a disingenuous polemical artince, that it can be promised by
judicial deci-
treated as having that effect. No judgment pronounced As-
under such circumstances can afford a measure of the quality of a
theological work, so as either to preclude the right, or to dispense
with the need of examining it from a different point of view for
the purpose of estimating its orthodoxy. The distinction between
a judgment pronounced on a work in its purely theological aspect,
and one delivered by a judge before whom the author is prose-
cuted for heresy, may appear somewhat subtle and difficult to
grasp. But unless it be admitted, and in the sense, that the
same person might consistently, when exercising the functions of
a Judge, acquit that which he had condemned as a Divine, we
should be driven to a conclusion revolting to common sense. For
it would follow that, on the appearance of a work in which a
16
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
clergyman broached unsound doctrine which might expose him to
legal penalties, a Bishop, who lies under a special obligation to
guard the purity of the Church's doctrine, would be the one
person in his diocese who would have no right, even when con-
sulted by those who are entitled to his advice and guidance, to
express an unfavourable opinion of the work, because be might
afterwards be called upon to sit in judgment on the author,
writings of We may venture to believe that no very strong
clergymen sensation would have been excited in the public mind
productive by a layman who in our day should have revived the
of different .
effects. speculations of Spinoza and Hume on the absolute
impossibility, or the incredibility of miracles. They would have
been felt to belong to a metaphysical system, so wholly foreign to
the principles of the Church, as to render it needless for Church-
men to protest against it, and quite allowable for them to decline
a controversy where the disputants had scarcely any common
ground to stand on. But just for this reason the reproduction of
these opinions in the work of a clergyman, could hardly fail to
excite general surprise ; and it is only a little less surprising that
the fact should appear to any one so natural, and so manifestly
consistent with the author's profession, as to make it absurd to
attach any importance to it, and wrong to treat it as, with respect
to his ecclesiastical position, worthy of censure. "When we think
for a moment of the Evangelical History, and of the Creeds, to
say nothing of the Liturgy, we rather find it difficult to argue
the incongruity of such views with the teaching of our Church,
for the opposite reason : because the proving of a point so evident,
would be a waste of words. And this difficulty is increased when
we find that the writer, in whose view the study of the " evidences
of Christianity " must lead every duly cultivated mind to reject
the belief in supernatural interposition, appears altogether to
ignore the existence of any but secondary, or — as they are some-
times termed by an unfair assumption, — natural causes in the
world. He admits indeed that the " broader views of physical
truth, and universal order in nature," which are now increasingly
prevalent, " point to the acknowledgment of an overruling and
CHARGES.
17
all-pervading supreme intelligence." * But this language would
at least as aptly express the fundamental doctrine of Spinoza, as
that of any theist ; especially when coupled with the statements,
that " creation is only another name for our ignorance of the
means of production," t and that " the Divine Omnipotence is
entirely an inference from the language of the Bible : " + and the
argument employed to prove the impossibility of miraculous inter-
position moves wholly within the circle of a purely materialistic
philosophy. It would however be unfair to overlook, that the
author sometimes expresses himself as if his standing-place was
still in some sense Christian ground, and as if in his own judg-
ment he was only doing his best to carry out the common object
of the Volume, by rescuing the subject which he handles from the
danger of " suffering by the repetition of conventional language,
and by traditional methods of treatment." He distinguishes
between the provinces of reason or science and of faith, as if both
had a real existence, though governed by different laws, and might
flourish peacefully side by side, if only their respective limits had
not been confounded by ill-judged attempts at mutual encroach-
ment. It may thus have appeared to him, that he was filling the
part of a peacemaker, and laying down the conditions of a lasting
reconciliation, between parties which had been separated through
an unhappy misunderstanding. We would fain believe that such
was the aim with which he undertook his last work, and may
hope that he himself derived comfort from the faith which he still
recognized as surviving the evidences which it was the object of
his argument to overthrow.
But our wishes and hopes cannot alter the nature of things, and
charity does not require or even permit us to shut our Dominion of
eyes to the truth. The distinction between the dominion science dis-
p „ tinct from
ox physical science and of faith, which qualifies the that of faith,
merely negative and destructive character of the general con-
clusion, is indeed a question of the gravest moment, and of an
interest quite independent of any temporary controversy. If it
be true that faith may find all that she needs, to satisfy her
* P- 126. ■(• P. 139. } P. 113.
VOL. II. C
18
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
highest aspirations, within her own sphere, and that she is there
secure and inaccessible to the inroads of physical science, which
neither seeks nor is able to invade her sanctuary, why should she
not be content with the undisturbed enjoyment of her proper and
undisputed domain ? That is the position on which the author
takes his stand, and in which he may have won the sympathy of
many who totally dissent from the negative side of his doctrine.
That there is such a life of faith, conversant with purely spiritual
truths, abstracted from all conditions of time and sense, could not
be denied without rejecting the experience of the holiest men in
all ages. We must go farther and say, that it is only with such
truths that faith is ever properly conversant. Historical facts are
the object of a historical belief, which Scripture itself teaches us
to distinguish from that faith which it describes as the indispens-
able condition of salvation.* I am sure that there is no error
against which you, my Reverend Brethren, would more earnestly
warn your hearers, than the confounding of this distinction. And
certainly such a faith has no injury to dread from the progress
of physical science. The region in which it lives and moves is
wholly spiritual and supramundane : one in which a science,
which deals only with the laws of matter, can find no footing, and
therefore must needs leave it in peace.
Thecondi- But then we must consider what is the price which,
wWchfaith on the author's terms, has to be paid for this security ;
is to be un-
molested, the condition on which faith is permitted to remain thus
unmolested. It is that she shall not attempt to cross the border
of her own province, and claim a standing-ground in the world of
nature ; in other words, that she shall hold no doctrine which
involves the supposition of a supernatural interruption in the pre-
determined sequence of physical phenomena. She must not only
forego, but renounce the belief in any such event. " Miraculous
narratives " may " become invested with the character of articles
of faith ; " but it is on condition that they be " accepted," not as
records of historical facts, but " in a less positive and certain light,
or perhaps as involving more or less of the parabolic or mythic
* James ii. 19.
CHARGES.
19
character."* Tliis restriction excludes, not only outward, super-
natural events, but also every fact of inward experience which
cannot be explained, on psychological grounds, as a phase of a
merely human development. A direct communication of Divine
grace would be as much a breach of continuity in the order of
causation as any visible miracle, and might as well be described
as only " another name for our ignorance of the mode of produc-
tion." It is indeed "confessed" "that, beyond the domain of
physical causation and the possible conceptions of intellect or
knowledge, there lies open the boundless region of spiritual things
which is the sole dominion of faith." t But this description seems
to show that there are two insurmountable obstacles to any com-
munication between this region and the material universe in which
we live. The things which belong to this spiritual region "lie
beyond the possible conceptions of intellect or knowledge," and
even if they could be grasped by our faculties in our present state
of being, as they are extrinsic to the domain of physical causa-
tion, there is no mode by which they could be conveyed to our
minds, but a supernatural intervention, which is rejected by
"intellect and philosophy," as " inconsistent with the universal
order and indissoluble unity of physical causes." It would be at
once a miraculous enlargement of human capacity, and the intro-
duction of a new element into the series of historical events, not
linked by a natural dependence with those which preceded it.
"We readily admit, or rather, as Christians, we earnestly maintain
the possibility of a direct communication between the Father of
spirits and the soul of man. But whatever is so imparted to man
is an object, not of simple faith, but of knowledge ; and since the
recipient of such a communication is not a disembodied spirit, but
one dwelling in a human frame, and so united with it, that every
successive idea and emotion involves a corresponding change in
the bodily organization, it is clear that a Divine inward revelation
is as much a miracle, and therefore, according to the Essayist's
view, as truly impossible as any related in the Bible.
And so it appears in what sense we are to understand the admis-
* P- 142. + p. 127.
c2
20
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
sion, which is held out as a compensation for so much that is
_. , . denied. The " dominion " assigned to faith may be filled
The domi- & J
s^neato with the most sublime and satisfying spiritual realities.
But since for man in his present state there is no
avenue through which he can receive any certain information
concerning it, it must for him remain, as long as that state lasts,
a region unknown and unknowable. Its realities are not such to
him. To him it is either a mere void, or peopled only with
phantoms, the creatures of his imagination, the reflex it may be
of his earthly experience, indefinitely enlarged and beautified. It
may be the object of a deep yearning, as a better country, a future
home ; but in no other sense can it properly be called the
" dominion " of faith.
The writer's There may, however, be danger of misunderstanding
posnion8Pr° in the use of such figurative expressions. And it is to
more am-
biguous. De regretted that the language employed by the author
in his positive statements is much less clear and precise than that
of his negative propositions. His reasoning against the possibility
of miracles, if indeed it consists of any thing more than naked
assertions, will be more or less convincing according to the state
of mind to which it is addressed ; but it leaves no room for doubt
as to its meaning.* On the other hand, his description of the
proper province and objects of faith is so vague and ambiguous,
that it is hard to believe he can himself have formed any distinct
notion of the sense in which it is to be understood. " An alleged
miracle can only be regarded in one of two ways : either
abstractedly, as a physical event, — and therefore to be investi-
gated by reason and physical evidence, and referred to physical
causes, — or as connected with religious doctrine, regarded in a
sacred light, asserted on the authority of inspiration." In the
latter case, " it ceases to be capable of investigation by reason, or
to own its dominion. It is accepted on religious grounds, and can
appeal only to the principle and influence of faith." t " The
* As this has been questioned, and the question involves some points of great
importance, I have considered it in a note, which will be found at the end of the
Charge.
t P. 142.
CHARGES.
21
miracles are merged in the doctrines with which they are connected,
and associated with the declarations of spiritual things, which are,
as such, exempt from those criticisms to which physical statements
would be necessarily amenable." * But an " alleged miracle " is
not the less a physical event because connected with religious
doctrine. It cannot on that account be less capable of investiga-
tion by reason. If it is " accepted on religious grounds," it is
accepted as a physical event, and only by those who do not admit
that as such it is incredible. It is not the more exempt from the
criticisms of those who have adopted that principle, though it may
have a stronger claim on their forbearance. So long, indeed, as
we confine ourselves to abstractions, such language may not
appear to involve any contradiction or absurdity. It assumes that
there is no real, but only an imaginary connection, between the
miracle and the doctrine ; so that the doctrine may be retained,
while the miracle is rejected. But the religion to which the
whole argument is meant to apply, is one in which the funda-
mental article of faith, according to the belief of the Church of
England, is itself a physical event, a historical fact, and, if true,
is supernatural. The fact and the doctrine are inseparably
blended together. To deny the fact is to reject the doctrine. It
is indeed possible to make away with the doctrine, and in its room
to substitute one which should not involve a departure from the
order of nature. What that doctrine should be, would indeed
have to be left to every one's private judgment. It might be
some moral truth ; it might be some philosophical speculation.
It might be " exempt from the criticisms to which physical state-
ments are amenable." But it would not be a mystery ; it would
not be a point of faith ; it would have no need to be held " sacred
from examination," and " shielded within the pale of the sanc-
tuary." Making no pretension to sanctity, it would claim neither
reverence nor indulgence, but would simply assert its right as a
matter of private opinion.
A different question arises as to the miracles which were simply
manifestations of the divine character of the Founder of our
* P. 143.
22
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
religion. They are not indeed, when considered each by itself, so
intimately connected with its fundamental truths ; there
lift mira- s is no one of them, except the Resurrection, so identified
culous.
with any article of faith, that if it had never been
wrought, or had never been recorded, it would have made any
difference in our creed. But it could only be through a strange
thoughtlessness that any one could maintain, that the Christian
faith would be no way affected, though all should be rejected as
matters of fact, and received only as " parables or myths."
When the miraculous portions of the Gospel history are expunged,
there will remain only a meagre outline of our Lord's life, ending
with His death. Discourses indeed, attributed to Him, will be
left, full of wisdom and holiness. But of the speaker Himself,
His character and work, it will be impossible, from sources so
utterly corrupt as, on this supposition, those to which alone we
have access, would be, to gain any distinct image. All that would
be known of Him with any approach to certainty, would be, that
having appeared as a teacher, and gathered disciples around Him,
He had provoked the enmity of the Jewish rulers, and been put
to death. All beyond this would be involved in obscurity, and
would only afford occasion for doubtful conj ectures. When the most
original and trustworthy accounts of His life had been so disfigured
by fiction, no reliance could be placed on reports contained in
them, of any declarations which He had made concerning Himself.
Consequence But the loss of all information which would enable us
follow the to set Him before our eyes, not as a mere abstraction,
rejection of
the miracles, but as a real living person, would be far from the most
painful consequence which would flow from this rejection of all
that purports to be miraculous in the history of His life. For even
as fiction, it must have had some adequate cause or occasion ; and
it would be hard to believe, that such a mass of miraculous
legends should have gathered round one who had never made
any pretence to supernatural powers ; and that works which He
never attempted or professed to perform, should have been repre-
sented as one main part of the business of His ministry, and as
that to which He constantly appealed as evidence of His divine
CHARGES.
23
mission.* I need not observe how dark a shade the alternative
supposition must cast even on the puritjr of His human character,
to which, nevertheless, those who would divest Him of all titles
to any higher ground of reverence, are used to point, as a com-
pensation for the divine attributes which they withhold from
Him. t
But here I feel myself bound to observe, — and it is a point
which in the heat of controversy we are all too apt to TheRemfe-
ti -ii • i> rences not
overlook, — that although these inferences appear to me absolutely
antagonistic
to follow unavoidably from the author's premisses ; though to ^e P°f
J r ~ session of
in my judgment he has entirely failed to reconcile his faith-
scientific theory with the elementary truths of the Christian faith ;
still, that which has been pointed out is no more than an infe-
rence : one which the author himself has not expressly drawn, but
on the contrary has earnestly striven to avoid : one therefore
with which personally he could not be fairly charged. We may
not only fain hope, but reasonably believe, that many at this day
who are perplexed with like intellectual difficulties, are neverthe-
less enabled to hold fast the foundation of a true and living faith,
perhaps more firmly than some who have never undergone the
like trial. However unintelligible to us may be the process by
which they are enabled to combine views, which we can only
regard as radically inconsistent with one another, this is no reason
for denying its existence, as a fact of the individual's conscious-
ness, which may be to him not the less satisfactory because he is
unable to explain it clearly to others, or even, it may be, dis-
tinctly to understand it himself. The student of nature, who,
without surrendering one particle of physical truth, or admitting
any restriction on the freedom of scientific investigation, is yet
able to withstand the most dangerous temptation which besets
his favourite pursuits — the tendency to a mechanical philosophy,
or the resting in second causes — and who, resigning himself to
* Matt. xi. 4 foil, and 20 foil. John xiv. 11. This is of course quite independent
of the question as to the value of the element of power in the miracles.
t As even M. Renan has not been prevented by his admiration for his " noble
initiateur," from reviving Woolston's worst outrage, and representing our Lord as
abetting Lazams and his family in a deliberate imposture.
24
BISHOP THIRIAVALL'S
the consciousness of his limited faculties and imperfect knowledge,
clings to the centre of his spiritual being, and finds a secure
anchorage in the love of his heavenly Father, as revealed in the
Gospel of Jesus Christ, — such a one exhibits one of the noblest
examples of Christian humility, wisdom, and self-control, that in
these days it is possible to witness.
But useful as these considerations may be to guard us against
rash judgments with regard to persons, they cannot alter the plain
sense of words, or the character of propositions, or empty them of
the inferences logically involved in them. Every one is at liberty
to disown conclusions which flow unavoidably from his premisses ;
and we may often rejoice in this inconsistency, where we believe
it to be sincere ; but it can neither break the tie which knits the
premisses to the conclusion, nor prevent others from perceiving
that connexion, and so feeling themselves constrained either to
adopt or to reject both. "What must become of Christianity after
its supernatural groundwork has been withdrawn from under it, I
do not now inquire. But to maintain that the fundamental
doctrines of the Church of England can survive that displacement,
is a paradox which no ingenuity can reconcile with common sense,
objectofthe It has been said,* and, as I am quite willing to believe,
writers of
the Essays, with justice, that "the object of the writers was not to
create, but to remove difficulties in the way of the reception of the
truth as it is in Jesus ; " "to place Christianity beyond the reach
of accidents whether of science or criticism." But the excellence
of the end could not relieve them from all responsibility in the
choice of means ; and the whole question is whether the means
adopted are such as can be reconciled with their relations to the
Church. No doubt, when the supernatural origin of Christianity
is abandoned, it will be effectually secured from many assaults ;
for as against the larger part of its adversaries there will remain
nothing to defend. When that point is once conceded to them,
they in their turn will be liberal enough on every other. As they
do not deny the existence of the Christian religion, or of a body
calling itself the Church of Christ, they will mostly be very
* By Mr. Kennard, u. s. p. 134.
CHARGES.
25
tolerant of any other mode of accounting for the historical fact.
They will not be averse from the theory, that it entered into the
designs of Providence, as an instrument for the education of the
world. Viewing it in that light, they may not even scruple to
speak of it as divine ; for they will admit that it has as much
right to that epithet as any other event in the history of mankind.
They will not begrudge the praise due to its beneficent influence
on the progress of civilisation ; and there are hardly any terms
which some of them would find too strong to express their respect
and admiration for the character, whether real or ideal, of its
Founder. Rousseau and Strauss have been eloquent on this theme.
But, on the other hand, they whose " difficulties " are to be
" removed " by this concession, will be satisfied with nothing short
of it. Of all the other questions discussed in this- volume, there is
not one in which they would feel the slightest interest, unless so
far as the way in which it is treated may seem to lead to that
conclusion. Any rejection of particular miracles, any depreciation
of the authority of Scripture, any attempt to do away with all
specific difference between Christianity and other religions, or to
reduce it to the smallest amount, they would welcome, as a
promising indication, as a step in the right direction, as an instal-
ment of the full truth. But they would remain parted as much
as ever by an impassable gulf from every view of Christianity
which included a supernatural element. And so it has happened
that those of the Essayists who have most startled ordinary
readers by the boldness of their language, have in some quarters
incurred the reproach of timidity, of a want of openness and
sincerity. When so much was said, and by persons in their
positions, it seemed incredible that more should not be meant.
Where there was so near an approach, it was thought that only
outward and temporary causes could have prevented a complete
concurrence. Such censure might indeed have been regarded as
a proof that those on whom it fell had observed the right mean,
but only on condition that they had taken some pains to guard
themselves against misapprehension by positive statements.
I have not thought myself precluded from bringing out the
26
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
real character of the Essay which strikes most directly at the
Reasons for ro°t of revealed religion, by the author's removal out of
the'tnie* the sphere of personal controversy. He indeed has
the Essay on passed beyond the reach, not only of ecclesiastical censure,
but of literary criticism. But this is by no means the
case with his writings ; though to some it has appeared a reason
for refraining from pronouncing a decided judgment on his Essav.
It can never cease to occupy the foremost place in eveiy general
survey of the volume. And he himself would probably have
strongly deprecated such forbearance. As a sincere lover of
truth, a clear-headed thinker, and a practised writer, he would
hardly have been thankful for an indulgence which assumes that
his writings were not able to answer for themselves.
It might, however, well have been, — all things considered it
was, perhaps, rather to have been expected than otherwise, — that
among the other contributions to the volume, there should have
been some one which might have served to counteract the impres-
sion likely to be made by his Essay, and that this might have
induced the Editor to admit one which, if left to stand by itself,
neither refuted nor balanced by an opposite view, seemed to be
fraught with such alarming consequences. If such a corrective
was to be found, there is perhaps none of the Essays in which it
Essay on the would more naturally have been sought than the open-
E.lucationof * ° r
the World. mg one on the Education of the World. But the
relation in which this stands to the other is one, I will not say of
an opposite, but certainly of a very different kind. This indeed
is no fault of the author, who only happened not to have provided
for a want which he could not foresee ; but it is a fact worthy of
remark, as illustrating the general character of the volume. His
Essay stands apart from the rest, as well in its subject as in the occa-
sion which gave rise to it, having been originally delivered as a
Sermon before the University of Oxford. It is in fact a Lecture on
the Philosophy of History from the Christian point of view, and
Scheme of with special reference to Christianity. It was perhaps
the wnter. a]^ogether a happy thought to ground a theory on
the analogy, — due it may be to Pascal, who, however, employed
CHARGES.
27
it simply to illustrate the progress of knowledge,* — between
the development of the race and that of the individual. But the
scheme is that the period preceding the coming of Christ answers
to childhood, the age of law ; the "whole period from the closing
of the Old Testament to the close of the New," or that of the
Early Church, to youth, the age of example. The latest, when-
ever it may have begun, is that of manhood, in its mature, still
unabated vigour ; and this it is in which we of this day have
the happiness, a privilege indeed coupled with grave responsibility,
to live. The distinctive character of the present period is, that
the restraint of a merely outward law, and the influence of
example, have been superseded by the supremacy of the " spirit,"
which is identified with the " conscience," and which has now
" come to full strength, and assumed the throne intended for him
in the soul," where he is " invested" with plenary and absolute
judicial and legislative "powers."t This scheme includes a
vindication or elucidation of the Divine wisdom in the arrange-
ment by which the appearance of the great Example, in which
character alone our Lord is viewed, was ordained to coincide with
the world's youth. The peculiar fitness of this economy is thus
explained : — " Had His revelation been delayed till now, assuredly
it would have been hard for us to recognize His Divinity : for
the faculty of faith has turned inwards, and cannot now accept
any outer manifestations of the truth of God. Our vision of the
Son of God is now aided by the eyes of the Apostles, and by that
aid we can recognize the express image of the Father." " Had
* " Pensees, Fragments et Lettres, ed. Prosper Faugere. Preface sur le Traite
du Vide," p. 98. After having pointed out the advantage derived by each successive
generation from the accumulation of knowledge previously acquired, he proceeds :
" De sorte que toute la suite des hommes, pendant le cours de tant do siecles, doit etre
consideree comme un meme homme qui subsiste toujours et qui apprend continuelle-
ment : d'ou Ton voit avec combien d'injustice nous respectons l'antiquite dans ses
philosophes ; car comme la vieillesse est l'age le plus distant de l'enfance, qui ne voit
que la vieillesse dans cet homme uuiversel ne doit pas etre cherchee dans les temps
proches de sa naissance, mais dans ceux qui en sont les plus eloignes ? Ceux qui nous
appelons anciens etaient veritablement nouveaux en toutes choses, et formaient
l'enfance des hommes proprement : et commes nous avons joint k leurs connoissances
l'experience des siecles qui les ont suivis, c'est en nous que i'on peut trouver cette
antiquite que nous reverons dans les autres."
t P. 31.
28
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
He come later, the truth of His Divine Nature would not have
been recognized."*
_. All this was no doubt written with a view to edifica-
His argu-
Sted^in- ti°n ; but language more directly suggestive of the most
thanremove perplexing doubts, could hardly have been employed.
doubts. T . ill t o
It is not easy to understand on what ground a man of
mature intellect can be required or expected to view an object in
the same light in which it appeared to him in his youth ; or why
he should be better satisfied, if he was reminded that youth is the
age most susceptible of lively impressions. That, to his riper
judgment, might be exactly the reason why he should be no
longer governed by them. And so those who have been taught
that the age in which they live is one of independent thought,
in which conscience is invested with supreme authority, and which
is distinguished from former periods in the history of the world,
not only by larger knowledge, but by superior clearness of view,
must find it hard to reconcile this advantage with the require-
ment that they should look at a phenomenon of the past with the
eyes of its contemporaries, whose " vision " had not attained to
the same degree of keenness as their own. They must think it
strange that they should be asked to recognize our Lord's
How our Divinity, not upon any evidence directly offered to
nitydistobe themselves, but on the ground of an impression made
recognized. jjjg exampie on witnesses who, through the general
imperfection of their development, were much less capable of
accurately discerning the things presented to them, and above all
of drawing correct inferences from the seen to the unseen. And
this would appear to them the more unreasonable when they
found it laid down that, whenever " conscience and the Bible
appear to differ," the inference is, not that conscience is not suffi-
ciently enlightened, but that " the Bible, if rightly understood,
would be found to confirm that which it seems to contradict." t —
" Conscience is the supreme interpreter ; " J — and its system of
interpretation is grounded on the postulate, that the true sense of
Scripture is always conformable to its decisions. These at all
* Pp. 24, 25. t P- 44. } P. 45.
CHARGES.
29
events are to be obeyed, and the sanction of the Bible, when not
evident, is to be presumed. And yet one and not the least
authentic or important part of the Bible consists of the record
left by the Apostles of that " vision," by which they were led to
recognize their Lord's Divinity. But conscience would be abdi-
cating its prerogative, if it accepted the " aid of eyes," which were
illumined with a light so much less full than its own. This
would be a retrograde step, an example of that " tendency to go
back to the childhood and youth of the world," which " has
retarded the acquisition of that toleration which is the chief
philosophical and moral lesson of modern days." This lesson has
not yet been perfectly learnt ; though " we are now men," we
have still to grow riper in knowledge, and steadier in practice.
We shall not have reached absolute maturity, until we have
entirely ceased to rely on " the impulses of youth or the disci-
pline of childhood," and submit to no government but that of our
own principles. Those whose education has been so completed,
will of course cast aside the aids which they no longer need to
sustain their weakness. They will put away the childish and youth-
ful things which they will have then outgrown. These general
propositions are safe, but barren. The interesting question is,
What are the things which fall under this description ? Do they
include that belief which it is the object of the third Essay to root
up ? On this the author is silent, nor, under the circumstances
in which he first produced his discourse, could he have been
expected to speak. But he has reason to complain of a juxtaposi-
tion, by which a question which he had innocently suggested, has
been brought into outward connection with an answer which he
would no doubt earnestly repudiate.
If of this Essay nothing more can be fairly said, than that it
opens the broadest room for an assault on the foundations of
historical Christianity, without setting up any defence against it,
this would not be enough to describe the bearing of some of the
others on the same question. A much more positive character of
, m the second ,
impression on the same side is left by the second Essay, Essay,
though it is on other accounts that it has given more general offence
30
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
than any other in the volume, and not least to those who most
revere the honoured name which it bears on its title. It purports,
indeed, to be only a sketch of the most important results of the
researches of another author, which therefore could throw no direct
light on the opinions of the reviewer. The difficulty of collecting
these with certainty is much increased by the writer's character-
istic manner ; and might well seem almost insurmountable to one
who was called upon, under judicial responsibility, to extract any
definite propositions from such a series of epigrams and enigmas.
But to any one who only desires to form a judgment on their main
drift for his own satisfaction, there can be no doubt as to their
general tendency, though it may not be quite clear to what extent
they follow it out. It is manifest that the review is designed, not
simply as a report, but as a vindication of the views described.
There is an occasional expression of dissent, but mostly on points
in which the author, in the opinion of his critic, has erred on the
side of credulity, and so in contradiction to the spirit of his own
system. That any difference exists between them on any funda-
mental principles, which was not thought worthy of the slightest
notice, would be hardly credible, as it would imply a want of
candour and openness, where reserve would have been alike im-
proper and unnatural.
The question ^e opening remarks, at least, are entirely the
natural" Essayist's own, and they bear mainly on the question of
supernatural agency. Even here, indeed, the ambiguity
which marks his style in the treatment of theological subjects, and
which may perhaps be traced as much to the vagueness of his
views as to the character of his mind, obliges us to be very
cautious when we undertake to interpret his language, and some-
what distrustful of the result. But the passages which are most
salient and pregnant, and which seem least likely altogether to
conceal the thought which they may fail distinctly to express, all
point unmistakably in the same general direction. It is only just
to admit that they contain no express denial of the possibility of
miraculous interference. They merely indicate the various grounds
on which it has been questioned. It may even seem as if its
CHARGES.
31
reality was recognized ; for it is said that there are " cases in
which we accept the miracle for the sake of the moral lesson." *
But as it is certain that in fact no one ever believed in a miracle
for the sake of a moral lesson, which indeed the miracle, as such,
could not convey ; so the context indicates the meaning to be,
that we accept the miracle for the sake of the moral lesson, only as
we accept a fruit for the sake of the kernel, in its shell, which
we break and throw away : and this is in perfect conformity with
the sense in which we have already heard from another of the
authors, that " an alleged miracle is accepted on religious grounds."
The writer is strongly impressed with the importance of the
question ; only, according to his wont, he states it in such a
manner as to exclude the possibility of more than one answer ;
for when our choice is limited between the alternatives, " whether
God's Holy Spirit has acted through the channels which His
Providence ordained, or whether it has departed from these so
signally, that comparative mistrust of them ever after becomes a
duty," there can be no room for rational hesitation : and he
himself anticipates an approaching unanimity on this head, among
all whose minds are not either narrowed by priestcraft and for-
malism, or darkened by moral corruption.! Whether the
question, thus stated, can be correctly termed a question at all,
and is not simply a form of controversial argument which begs
the real question, I need not ask. But certainly there is a far
greater question, one on which minds are at this day divided, and
on which, as we have seen, one of the contributors to this volume
has pronounced a very decided opinion ; namely, the
Has there
question whether there has ever been in the history of everbeen
* « any super-
mankind any interposition of a supernatural agency, or JJ^pogi-
simply a course of events, ordained indeed by Divine tlon '
Providence, but linked together in an unbroken sequence of
purely natural causes and effects. This is indeed a great question,
one of momentous bearing on the truth of Christianity ; and it is
also a real question, not involving the only possible answer, but
one on which men may and do take opposite sides. This writer
*P. 51. f P. 52.
32
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
not only substitutes a fictitious and misleading question for the
real issue, but passes over the single important point in a silence
which, considering the occasion for speech, we can hardly help
regarding as emphatic. It is not he who will pronounce super-
natural interference impossible ; all that he maintains is, that if
possible, it would be useless, and that the whole result of the most
mature observation on the education of the world is in favour of
the opposite alternative. Yet his language might lead an in-
cautious reader to believe that he had incidentally conceded the
whole matter in dispute ; for in a note he speaks of an " irrational
supernaturalism." It may seem to follow that he admits a super-
naturalism which he regards as rational. And so indeed he does ;
but no one who studies the context can fail to see what kind of
supernaturalism this is.* It is simply the order of Divine Pro-
vidence, which so far may be said to be above nature, though
strictly limited to natural "channels." The actings of the Holy
Ghost through these channels are supernatural, inasmuch as they
are in their origin Divine, though not at all confined to the
Christian revelation. That is a revelation, but only in the same
sense, in which every religion which contains any " elements of
good " is a Divine, and therefore supernatural revelation also.
The Essayist, whose opinions in this volume it is sometimes
difficult to distinguish from those of the author whom he reviews,
had previously written much on kindred topics. And the con-
clusion to which I was led, as to the impression likely to be made
by a work in which he spoke throughout in his own person, was
that " its ultimate tendency was to efface the distinction between
*M. E. Renan, in his "Etudes d'histoire religieuse," p. 137, has a note on the
use of the term surnaturel, which may help to throw light on the sense in which it is
employed by the Essayist. Having observed in the text, " l'essence de la critique est
la negation du surnaturel," he subjoins in the note: " Une explication est devenue
necessaire sur ce mot, depuis que des ecrivains ont pris l'habitude de designer par le
mot surnaturel l'element idealiste et moral de la vie, en opposition avec l'element
materialiste et positif. En ce sens, on ne pourrait nier le surnaturel sans tomber dans
un grossier sensualisme qui est ausai loin que possible de ma pensee ; car je crois au
contraire que seule la vie intellectuelle et morale a quelque prix, et une pleine realite.
J'entends ici par surnaturel le miracle, c'est-a-dire, un acte particulier de la Divinite,
venant s' inserer dans laserie des evenements du monde physique et psychologique et
tlerangeant le cours des faits en vue d'un gouvernement special de l'humaniteV'
CHAEGES.
33
natural and revealed religion." His reply to that remark was in
the form of a question, raising a doubt as " to the reality of
the distinction between Natural and Revealed, and Digtinction
whether it does not diminish, if not vanish, upon a Natural ana
view of the comprehensiveness of the Divine dealings," Religion,
or " upon examination of St. Paul's argument to the Romans and
Galatians." In perfect accordance with this intimation,' he
observes in the Essay : " It is not a fatal objection (to what he
thinks the 'reasonable' interpretation of St. Paul's words) to say
that St. Paul would thus teach Natural Religion, unless we were
sure that he was bound to contradict it ; " and that it would be a
great "relief to some minds, to find the antagonism between
Nature and Revelation vanishing in a wider grasp and deeper
perception of the one, or in a better balanced statement of the
other." * I need hardly observe that there never has been, or
could be, a question as to a contradiction or antagonism between
Natural and Revealed Religion — truth can never contradict truth
— and therefore the supposed objection which is brought forward
to be so refuted is purely imaginary ; but it diverts the reader's
attention from the real point at issue, which is not, whether there
is " antagonism " between Natural and Revealed Religion, but
whether there is any essential distinction between them, or they
are only different names for the same thing. This question must
hinge on that of supernatural agency ; on which, as I have said,
I am quite aware that men may and do take opposite sides. But
that a clergyman of the Church of England is at liberty to
take which he will, I cannot so easily understand or so readily
admit.
The Essayist adverts to a doubt which some may feel as to his
author's claim to the name of Christian, notwithstand- p^ioaophy
ing the orthodoxy of his language : for he exposes oftheEssay-
himself, it is said, to the charge of " using Evangelical language in
a philosophical sense." But in the critic's own opinion, the
philosophical sense is simply the " reasonable " sense. He himself
thinks it "possible to defend our traditional theology, if stated
* P. 81.
vol. n. D
34
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
reasonably." That his author was an adherent of any more
special philosophy than that of reason or good sense, the reader
would never, by any word of his, be led to suspect. Indeed, if it
were not almost incredible, it might be supposed that he was not
aware of it himself. For when he has occasion to allude to the
sources from which his author's speculations on the Trinity may
seem to have been drawn, he admits that they have a Sabellian or
almost a Brahmanical sound (and again, p. 90, a Brahmanical
rather than a Christian sound). That they have any affinity to
those of a School of much more recent date, and much nearer
home, — not of Ptolemais or Benares, but of Berlin, — he entirely
ignores. He is indeed partly aware of one wide difference between
his author's position and his own. His author was " a philosopher
sitting loose to our Articles," in plainer words, bound by no
obligations, save that of his diffusive Christian charity, to the
Church of England : in that respect at full liberty, either abso-
lutely to reject any of her doctrines, or to adopt them in any
sense or with any modification he might prefer. But how far
such liberty may be rightfully claimed, or such laxity as to the
Articles consistently exercised, by a Clergyman of the Church of
England, is certainly a different question ; one in which the
example of the illustrious foreigner can afford no guidance to persons
placed in entirely different relations. That which was possible
for him " without any paltering with his conscience," may not be
so for them. He indeed could reconcile his philosophical system
with a faith which in him yielded the richest fruits of the
Christian life. But in the judgment of his critic, this was rather
an amiable weakness, than a model for imitation, for, as he thinks,
"the philosopher's theology could hardly bear to be prayed."*
It was better adapted to the School, than to the Church or the
closet. The prayers of the Christian were " not brought into
entire harmony" with the "criticisms" of the philosophical
(Hegelian) theologian. This discordance is represented as indi-
cating an imperfection, not in the quality of the theology, but in
that of the religious consciousness. " It may be," it is said,
* P. 91.
CHARGES.
35
" that a discrepancy is likely to remain between our feelings and
our logical necessities:" but it is one "which we should con-
stantly diminish ; " not of course by a vain attempt to elude a
logical necessity, but by reconciling our feelings, as well as we
may, to a theology which will not bear to be prayed.
The most remarkable Essay in the volume is one which might
have been entitled " a plea for National Churches ^ wa_
established on comprehensive principles." We must all sonsE3Say-
sympathize with the writer's object, so far as it is to vindicate the
national character of our own Church, among others, against those
who deny the lawfulness of any established Church, and we may
fully assent to his general position, that the Apostolical Churches,
though differing from it as to their relation to the State, were not
more exclusive in principle, and were constantly tending toward
that outward form into which they were finally brought by the
recognition which they received from the Civil Power : though
we may hesitate to adopt his opinion as to the extent to which the
Apostles tolerated both the rejection of fundamental truths, and
viciousness of life, among those who called themselves by the
name of Christ. It seems to rest on a doubtful interpretation of
some obscure texts, and on an assumption as to the nature of the
Apostolical discipline, not warranted by our very scanty know-
ledge of the internal condition of the primitive Churches in the
earliest stage of their history. But the question with which we
are now concerned is not one of antiquarian erudition. It is one
of the highest practical moment, which may and must be decided
on general principles ; and the Essay is chiefly occupied with a
statement — which indeed includes a discussion of a great variety
of very important though subordinate questions — of the conditions
on which a National Church, such as our own, may condition of
hope to endure and prosper. It cannot do so unless it perffy of
i> • National
realizes, if not m its absolute fulness, yet in a sufficient churches,
measure, the idea implied in the title which it bears, unless it is,
as nearly as possible, not merely in name but in deed, the Church
of the whole nation. But this, according to the author's view, it
can never be, unless it be freed " from dogmatical tests and other
d 2
36
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
intellectual bondage." It was, he thinks, the unhappy, though
perhaps unavoidable mistake of Constantine, that together with
his " inauguration of midtitudinism," (that is, of a system
including members in various stages of spiritual life, and not
limited by Calvinistic terms of communion,) " by the sanction
which he gives to the decisions of Nicea," he inaugurated the
essentially incongruous " principle of doctrinal limitation."
" Sufficiently liberated from the traditional symbols," a National
Church like our own might comprehend all but Calvinistic Non- '
conformists (an exception indeed which would probably exclude
four-fifths of our Dissenters). It will be untrue to its essential
character, and will provoke separation, " if it submits to define
itself otherwise than by its own nationality," or if it lays any
restraint on freedom of thought and speech among its ministers,
from which other classes are exempt.*
Adjustment Such being the general object in view, the question
tonewwfn^8 arises, how is it to be attained ; or " what is the best
method of adjusting old things to new conditions ; " in
other words, what changes are needed in the existing state of
things ? The result of this inquiry is, in the author's view,
cheering and hopeful, to a degree which must startle many, who
suppose the actual obstacles greater than they are. It turns out
that they are more apparent than real, and that even now there is
in fact next to no doctrinal limitation at all. In the first place it
is observed, that " as far as opinion privately entertained is con-
cerned, the liberty of the English clergyman appears already to
Liberty of De complete."! Many persons have been startled by
clergymen. 0];)Serva-t)iori) just on account of its unquestionable
truth. For a man hardly likes to be reminded that, as a free
citizen, he is at liberty to harbour the foulest thoughts, and the
most nefarious intentions, as long as he does not let them appear
in word or deed ; and the suggestion would certainly sound like
the most shameless Jesuitical sophistry, if an English clergyman
was really bound to any opinions, either by virtue of his office, or
by subscription, or the use of certain formularies. But the writer
* Pp. 173, 174. t P. 180.
CHARGES.
37
proceeds to show that this is not really the case ; that subscription
to the Articles may mean any thing, and therefore means nothing ;
that to allow signifies only an acquiescence, totally distinct from
approval, and consistent with the deepest abhorrence of the thing
allowed ; that nothing more definite is implied in the acknowledg-
ment of them " to be agreeable to the "Word of Grod ; " partly
because acknowledge may mean simply not to gainsay, and partly
because it is impossible to fix the import of that to which the
Articles are declared to be agreeable. For " when once the freedom
of interpretation of Scripture is admitted," it will be "happily
found " that " the Articles make no effectual provision for an
absolute uniformity." The only question indeed will be, whether,
with that freedom of interpretation which is advocated and illus-
trated in the Essay itself, they make any provision for any kind
or degree of uniformity.
But since it turns out that a clergyman of the Church of
England, if he only knew his own happiness, already enjoys
almost absolute freedom, not only of thought, but of speech,
unfettered by Bible, Articles, or Liturgy, what more can be
needed to fulfil the idea of a National Church exempt from
doctrinal limitation ? All that remains to be done is to remove
the appearance of a restraint by which some are perplexed and
deterred either from the communion or the ministry of the
Church ; and for this purpose in the first place to abolish the
bugbear of an unmeaning subscription, and let the subscnp-
Articles remain as a regulative symbol, not to be Articles,
impugned. So treated, they will, it is supposed, be at once safe
and harmless ; secured from contradiction by the protecting
statute, and incapable of provoking separation, because they will
have only a negative value ; a venerable relic, kept out of the
reach, both of rude desecration, and of superstitious use. The
only remaining obstacle would arise from the Liturgical Liturgical
formularies, which " present a fair and substantial repre- formulanes-
sentation of the Biblical records, incorporating their letter and
presupposing their historical element." " If they embodied only
an ethical result, addressed to the individual and to society, the
38
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
speculative difficulty would not arise." But unhappily they seem,
and are commonly thought, to do something more ; and hence
arises a fresh prohlem. But with this the author does not deal
quite so satisfactorily as with that of the Articles. He does not
propose to empty the Liturgy of doctrine, but merely points out
that it can have no more definite meaning than the Biblical
records themselves. But as it was not the real, but the apparent
stringency of subscription that calls for its abolition, and for con-
signing the Articles to an honourable seclusion, so it would seem
that the like appearance of a doctrinal character of the Liturgy
requires a similar treatment, and that it cannot be safe to leave it
in its present form, without any guarantee that it shall be
effectually explained away, so as to evacuate it of all doctrinal
substance. That which is so liable, so likely, if not certain, to
create misunderstanding which may provoke separation, ought
clearly, on the author's principles, to be either entirely abolished,
or reduced to a form, in which it could not be suspected of
embodying more than ethical results.
This however leads us to observe another defect in the scheme,
which the author seems to have overlooked. Even after all doctrinal
limitation, hitherto either really or apparently presented by Bible,
Articles, and Liturgy, shall have been cleared away, whether by
legislative enactment or bv an enlightened interpretation.
No provision ° J o r >
against s^i\\ there is the clergyman himself who may provoke
separation by his doctrine. He will indeed have been
released from all restraints which were intended to secure what
was called the soundness of his teaching ; but no security is sug-
gested to guard society and the Church against the mischief which
he may cause if he should happen to have doctrinal opinions of
his own ; if, for instance, he should believe that the Articles are
agreeable to the Word of God, in a certain definite sense, and that
the Liturgy embodies something more than ethical results.
►Surely the National Church would have a right to be protected
against the danger of schism, which would arise from the indis-
creet disclosure of such views. It is not enough that a clergyman
should be forbidden to impugn the Articles for the sake of those
CHARGES.
39
who assent to them. It would be equally necessary that he
should, also be restrained from giving offence to those who reject
them, by preaching in accordance with his own view of their
import. The proper use of the Articles and other doctrinal for-
mularies, on the author's principles, would seem to be that they
should serve as a table of subjects, from which the clergyman
should be strictly enjoined to abstain in the pulpit. This, of
course, would only affect the freedom of his public ministrations,
and he would have no right to complain ; for, " as far as opinion
privately entertained is concerned," he would still be at liberty to
hold what are now called orthodox views.
But after the obligations of a minister of the National Church
have been thus determined on the negative side, it is still The positive
functions of
necessary that some functions of a positive kind should clergymen,
be assigned to him, and he cannot be entirely divested of the
character of a teacher. It is true this description does not exhaust
all that may be properly considered as belonging to his office.
His position may afford peculiar opportunities for beneficent action,
which it will be a part of his duty to turn to the best account.
But still the functions of a public teacher are at least among those
which must always be most characteristic of his ministerial calling,
and, indeed, will be rather likely to supersede every other. We
must therefore see how these will have to be performed in that
Church of the future which is foreshadowed in this Essay. If its
language is to be understood in its most obvious sense, there can
be no doubt as to the author's views on this head. It is clearly
laid down * that " the service of the National Church is as pro-
perly an organ of the national life as a magistracy, or a legislative
estate ; " and that " to set barriers before the entrance upon its
functions, by limitations not absolutely required by public policy,
is to infringe upon the birthright of the citizens." If we wish to
know what these needless limitations are, we find that they are
the doctrinal limitations which have been before described as the
bane of all Multitudinist Churches, and at variance with their
essential character. "When the office of the Church is properly
* P. 190.
40
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
understood,"* it will be found that its objects nearly coincide
with those of the State. In fact, Church and State are only the
Nation considered under different aspects. The immediate object
of the State is the maintenance of public security and order. But
the Nation, if it is conscious of its highest objects, "will not con-
tent itself with the rough adjustments and rude lessons of law and
police." The State itself will desire that all its people should be
brought under a moral influence, which will supply motives of
conduct, operating toward the same end, but at once nobler,
stronger, and purer than those which only impose an outward
restraint. For the fulfilment of this desire, the nation " will
throw the best of its elements into another mould," and out of
them "constitute a spiritual society," to exercise that " improving
influence," under which the State would have " all its people to
be brought." This society is the Church. But the purposes
both of Church and State would be defeated alike by " errors and
mistakes in defining Church membership, and bv a repulsive mode
of Church teaching." The preservative against this danger, even
if it was not distinctly pointed out, would be obvious enough from
the nature of the case. It is to confine the Church's teaching to
T . matters in which Church and State have a common inte-
Limitatioii
church's resk But the State can have no " concern in a system of
teaching. relations founded on the possession of speculative truth."
And therefore this is and should be treated as alien to the object of
the Church. " Speculative doctrines should be left to philosophical
schools. A National Church must be concerned with the ethical
development of its members, and the wrong of supposing it to be
otherwise, is participated by those of the clericalty who consider the
Church to be founded, as a society, on the possession of an abstract-
edly true and supernaturally communicated speculation concerning
God, rather than upon the manifestation of a divine life in man."
It is impossible to listen to such a reflection without asking
how far it is well founded. And this concerns us the more
nearly, the more fully we assent to the author's general view
of the proper object of a National Church. That this is to act
• Pp. 194 foil.
CHARGES.
41
on the spiritual nature of its members, with a view to their
ethical development, we shall all, I trust, readily admit, how-
ever conscious we may be of our individual shortcomings, in
our several contributions toward the progress of the work. But
while we may be surprised to hear any one — above all, one of our
brethren in the ministry — speak of any thing which we regard as
supernaturatty communicated truth, as a speculation, so long as we
believe ourselves to be in possession of such truth, we could not
without both great dishonour to it, and I hope no little injustice
to ourselves, as a body, admit that absence of all real connexion
between such truth and the manifestation of a divine life in man,
as both this reproach of " the clericalty," and the whole tenor of
the author's statements, assumes. We cannot be more thoroughly
convinced of the truth itself, than we are that, if supernaturally
communicated at all, it was so with a view to that manifestation.
We may indeed have reason to reproach ourselves with the imper-
fection of our mode of teaching in this respect, however we may
question the right of any one of our number to rebuke the rest on
this score : but we are very sure that, if our best endeavours are
inadequate to the object, it is not because we are mistaken in
supposing a connexion between the truth and the life, but because
we are not ourselves sufficiently impressed, and therefore fail to
impress others, with its reality.
It is not essential to my immediate object to inquire how far
the proposed solution of the problem, " the best method Practica-
. . ... . bility of the
of adjusting old things to new conditions," is practicable, scheme.
We are now concerned rather with the principles on which it is
founded, than with the measure of success which may be likely to
attend it. But yet the practical inquiry is not only interesting in
itself, but may help to throw light on the theory. The author
himself indeed warns us against extravagant expectations. " It is
not to be expected," he says, " that terms of communion could be
made so large as by any possibility to comprehend in the National
Church the whole of such a free nation as our own. There will
always be those who from a conscientious scruple, or from a desire
to define, or from peculiarities of temper, will hold aloof from the
42
BISHOP THIRLW ALL'S
religion and the worship of the majority." It is not easy to
understand how either conscientious scruples or peculiarities of
temper should keep any aloof from a religion and worship, which
had been didy weeded of all " speculative doctrines : " but " a
desire to define " would no doubt be in direct contradiction to the
whole spirit of a scheme, which aims at the utmost possible level-
ling of all doctrinal barriers. It is only a little surprising, that
the author should pass so lightly over this obstruction, and should
appear to be so little aware of the extent to which it is likely to
interfere with the comprehensiveness of a National Church, such
as would realize his idea. He considers Calvinistic opinions as
CaJvinistic fundamentally adverse to the very notion of a Multitu-
opinions ad-
Nartfonaia dinist or National Church. How widely such opinions
Church. prevail among our Nonconformists, he seems hardly to
have taken into account. Still less does he notice the great
number of persons who — however inconsistently, according to his
view — do in fact reconcile Calvinistic tenets with membership in
the Established Church, and with the functions of its ministry.
But those who do not hold these tenets may hold others to which
they are not less decidedly attached, and if so, " the desire to
define " will in them be very likely to take the shape of a strong
repugnance to terms of communion, which in their judgment are
not sufficiently definite. The one class would say : " If we
tolerate a National Church, which we admit is not quite in har-
mony with our principles, it is only on condition that it teaches
sound doctrine." The others would say: "Much as we value a
National Church, we must abandon it, if it renounces its office of
teaching that which we believe to be the truth." Even in point
of numbers, those who would " hold aloof" or separate themselves
from the new National Church, just on account of its breadth and
freedom, would constitute a very formidable secession. But, what
is a still graver consideration, these dissenters would include
almost all the earnest religious feeling of the nation. The author
alludes to the masses both of the educated and the uneducated
class, who — as appeared from the census of 1851 — neglect to
attend any means of public worship. He supposes these persons
CHARGES.
48
to be " alienated from the Christianity which is ordinarily pre-
sented in our churches and chapels," solely " because
1 Jm Why the
either their reason or their common sense is shocked masses are
alienated
by what they hear there." This is indeed a somewhat Sm?ches
bold assumption, and it might have seemed possible to and Lhapel8,
assign a different cause for the absence of some at least of them from
all public worship. But if we give all of them credit for higher
intelligence and a finer moral sense than belong to the rest of
their countrymen, we can hardly believe their religious cravings
to be very strong. Unhappily, it is a notorious fact with regard
to very many of them, that they have been alienated from all
Christian communion, not by " conscientious scruples," nor by
" peculiarities of temper," least of all by " the desire to define,"
but by the total absence of any kind of religious belief which
could express itself in worship. They are practical, if not specu-
lative, atheists, not acknowledging a God in the world, and living
as if there was none. Beside those who have reached this
extreme, there are, it is to be feared, many, both educated and
uneducated, who are not less opposed to every form of revealed
religion.
It may seem that this is the class most likely to be won to a
National Church in which they would not be offended by any
speculative doctrines, and the only business of the minister would
be to promote their ethical development. The author deals in
some detail with the case of persons, who hold aloof from the
Church of England, because they are unable to reconcile its real
or supposed dogmatism with the advanced state of their scientific
or literary knowledge. For their benefit, or that of his brethren
who may be called upon to recover them to the Church, he
expounds the principle of "ideology." Even though for some
time to come the formularies of the Church should con- ,
Ideology
tinue to " present a fair and substantial representation exPounded-
of the Biblical records," their effect may be neutralized by the
application of this principle. As the ancient philosophers could
extract metaphysical or moral truth from the fables of the heathen
mythology, without either pledging themselves, or requiring the
44
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
assent of their hearers, to a single point of the mythical narrative
as matter of fact, the like treatment may be applied to the
Biblical records ; and, however they may be emptied of the
historical element, its place will be abundantly supplied by the
" ideas " which they will not cease to " awaken." The author
thinks, indeed, that this method of interpretation has been
"carried to excess" by Strauss,* whom he represents with some
exaggeration as "resolving into an ideal the whole of the historical
and doctrinal person of Jesus." But not only has he omitted to
draw any line which might have precluded this excess, but he
seems not to be aware that on Strauss' s principle no such line can
be drawn, and that Strauss has only followed out his principle
to its legitimate conclusion. The fundamental assumption, the
groundwork of the whole system, is the absolute rejection of
supernatural interference. When that principle is once laid down,
there can be no exception or selection among miraculous narra-
tives. All must pass out of the domain of history into that of
fiction. When, therefore, the author says that " liberty must be
left to all as to the extent in which they apply the principle,"
this does not correctly express the state of the case. On the one
hand there is, instead of liberty, a logical necessity, by which the
application must be carried to the denial of every supernatural fact
of revealed religion. On the other hand it may be thought that
the Church, when she teaches truths involving such facts, does fix
certain " limits," beyond which such " liberty " cannot be
"exercised," whether " reasonably " or not, consistently with the
confession of her fundamental doctrines. But, at all events,
nothing short of the extent which the principle requires will
satisfy the scientific and literary sceptics, whose views are repre-
sented in the third Essay, and whom the author of the fourth
wishes to conciliate by the substitution of the ideal for the real
" in the scriptural person of Jesus."
It only remains to consider what will be gained when this has
been done, and what is the prospect of winning the irreligious class
for whose sake we are to run so great a risk of losing all who
* P. 200.
CHARGES.
45
sincerely profess the faith of Christ. They will not be offended
by the announcement of any " supernaturally communi- prog ^ of
cated truth." In the teaching of the National Church, ^"u^us116
when its office is properly understood, theology will cUss'
make way for " ethical results." It is assumed — with what
seems to me a strange neglect of patent facts — that as to ethical
results no speculative difficulty would arise ; as if a perfect
unanimity prevailed among the professors of moral philosophy, or
their various systems all led to the same practical results. But
since the National Church is still to be, in name at least, a
Christian Church, its ministers will probably teach Christian
ethics. But can they, indeed, reckon on a general acceptance of
this system among those who reject the supernatural origin of
Christianity ? Will it not be necessary that they should allow
equal latitude in ethical as in theological speculation ? If not, on
what ground can they claim a hearing from those who take an
entirely different view of the nature of happiness, of the obliga-
tions of duty, of the value and purpose of life ? If they preach
active, self-denying charity and heavenly-mindedness to men
whose maxim — the common, if not inevitable result of a mate-
rialistic philosophy — is, " Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we
die," what authority can they plead for their message? In what
character are they to present themselves, that can give any weight
to their exhortations ? They may indeed say, " We do not pre-
tend to guide your speculative opinions. You are at perfect
liberty to think as you will as to the origin and the doctrines of
Christianity. We do not even absolutely require you to admit
the historical existence of its Founder." And so far they may
find willing listeners. But if they proceed to say, " All we ask
is, that you should adopt the moral principles which Christ is
supposed to have taught, and should regulate your conduct in
conformity to them," — the answer which they would have reason
to expect would be, " We think ourselves the best judges of that
which concerns our manner of life ; and it is quite consistent with
the religious opinions which you allow us to retain. We can
understand those who, themselves believing in the divine authority
46
BISHOP THIEL WALL'S
of Jesus, come to us in His name. Though we cannot share their
faith, we respect their sincerity and earnestness ; we admit that
they are acting in accordance with their own professions. But
we do not know what right you have to call upon us to regulate
our lives by your opinions, rather than by our own inclinations."
And if such minds are prevented by unbelief from receiving moral
instruction, it can hardly be expected that they should be brought
to join in public worship, for which some common basis of belief
Attitude of *s more requisite.* The more highly educated may,
highly0™ indeed, be able to apply the ideological principle, so as to
uca e ' reduce the formularies, which appear to involve dogmas
which they reject, to a mere embodiment of ethical results. But
they might justly complain of being required to go through such
a process, for the sake of a result which they might attain as well
without it. They may think that the parables and myths, which
might once have been useful vehicles of truth, are no longer
suited to that maturity of intellect and conscience, which dis-
tinguishes the present period in the education of the world. They
may say, "For theologians these exegetical feats maybe a pleasant
exercise ; for us they are neither needful nor profitable ; and we
cannot repress a misgiving that this tampering with the natural
meaning of words is something worse than laborious trifling. It
seems to us hard to reconcile with perfect openness and truthful-
ness ; and we cannot help fearing that, however it may sharpen
the intellect, it is not likely to produce a wholesome effect on the
ethical development of those who practise it."
The drift of the whole scheme is to bring the Church down to
* M. Jules Simon, in the concluding part of his work, " La Religion Naturelle,"
discusses the question : " Si Ton peut et si Ton doit se meler aux exercices d'un
culte positif, quand on n'a pas d'autre croyance que la religion naturelle P" He
feels a difficulty (un embarras) which he states thus : " D'un cote, la religion natu-
relle nous enseigne l'utilite et la necessite d'un culte exterieur; de l'autre, il est
evident quelle nous laisse bien peu de moyens de rendre temoignage de notre foi,
et qu'elle nous met dam une impossibilite presque absolue de nous associer pour prier."
Nevertheless, he answers the question, though with evident reluctance, in the
negative. This is very noteworthy, because his system of natural religion is really
nothing more or leas than a philosophical abstraction from the positive doctrines of
Christianity, and appears to correspond as closely as possible to that which would
be left in the National Church, when freed, according to Mr. Wilson's scheme,
from "doctrinal limitations."
CHARGES.
47
the religious level of those who hold least of Christian doctrine ;
or — as this class is assumed to include the most en- Drjft0fthe
lightened minds in the nation — to lift the Church up sc eme'
to their intellectual level. And, unless the clergy are to lose all
influence over this class, this is the level on which they must take
their stand. The opponents of National Churches, who object to
them on religious grounds, would think their cause gained, when
it is admitted that a National Church can subsist only on such
conditions. But the graver question is, how far such a society
has any right to the name of a Church. It is not generally
understood that this name would be properly applied to an
association formed for the purpose of mutual " improvement,"
among persons of the most discordant views on all religious
matters, even if it was possible that such persons might be
unanimous as to the nature of the "improvement " which is the
common object. A Church, without any basis of a common faith,
is not only an experiment new in practice and of doubtful success,
but an idea new in theory, and not easy to conceive. And when
we remember the quarter from which this proposal comes, it may
well seem hardly credible that it can have been designed with so
great a latitude. I have had this difficulty fully in view through-
out my examination of this Essay ; but, after not only the most
attentive observation but the most careful search in my power, I
have been unable to discover so much as a hint to qualify the
apparently indefinite terms of the proposal. We have seen that
no such limitation is implied in the admission, that there will
after all remain some who cannot be gathered into the bosom of
the National Church. For they will be excluded mainly, not by
the nullity or vagueness, but by the definiteness of their belief.
And then it must be owned that there is some force in the remark,
— When a clergyman puts forth opinions, which he is aware must
startle and offend great numbers both of the clerical and lay
members of his own communion, it may be expected that, as well
for their sake as his own, he will not express himself in language
stronger or broader than is required for the full exposition of his
views ; that charity, no less than prudence, will lead him care-
48
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
fully to guard his statements from the risk of being misunderstood
in a sense which would be commonly thought inconsistent with
his profession. Otherwise he must be prepared to find that he is
generally suspected of meaning, not less but rather more than he
says ; and that the ambiguity, which in a layman might be
attributed to indistinctness of ideas, will in him be imputed to a
calculated reserve.
The relation ^ms Essay is the practical complement of that which,
totheSoneSon by the absolute rejection of all supernatural interposi-
Miracies. t[0U} SUDverf;S the historical basis of Christianity. The
one prepares us for a loss which it represents as inevitable, the
other offers the compensation of an ideal to be substituted for the
historical reality. That it retains any thing which would be
inconsistent with the principle by which all that, in our tradi-
tional belief, is derived from such interposition, is referred to the
evolution of merely natural causes, is nowhere intimated by a
single word, and is a supposition at variance with the whole tenor
of the Essay. It begins and ends with a speculation on the future
state. The mystery of God's dealings with that large part of
mankind which has not yet received the Gospel, is represented as
one chief cause of modern scepticism ; and it must have surprised
some readers to hear, that it is only through an enlargement of
geographical knowledge which has taken place " since our own
boyhood," that we have become aware of the existence of populous
empires in the far East, pagan, or even atheistic, which flourished
scepticism many ages before the Christian era. Within the sphere
recent geo- of the author's observation, it is this recent discovery
graphical m > m
discoveries, which has given the chief impulse to the sceptical move-
ments of our generation ; and, at all events he himself uses it to
show that, " without a denial of the broad and equal justice of the
Supreme Being," we cannot hold that " to know and believe in
Jesus Christ is in any sense necessary to salvation," though such
knowledge and belief may confer an advantage on its possessors,
involving an "unequal distribution of the divine benefits," of
which "no account can be given." The solution of the difficulty
is found in the uselessness of creeds ; and the Essay, as we have
CHARGES.
49
seen, is chiefly occupied with the exposure of their worthlessness
and noxiousness, and with practical suggestions for getting rid of
them. It turns out, indeed, that even within the pale of Chris-
tianity the like difficulty arises as with regard to the unconverted
heathen, and that we cannot be content with believing that the
Judge of all the earth will do right, unless we determine —
whether in contradiction or not to our Lord's words — what it is
right for Him to do. I am here only concerned to point out how
perfectly all this agrees with that appreciation of the author's
views, to which I have been led from every other point in the
Essay.
It seems needless for my present purpose to enter into any
farther details on the contents of this volume. Of the three
remaining Essays one is the work of a layman, and therefore,
even if it had been distinguished from the rest by the boldness of
its speculations, it would not have been liable to the censure
which they have incurred. It might, indeed, have helped to
mark more distinctly the character of the miscellany. But in
fact it does not even so much as this. The author has used his
privilege with great moderation. If he had been a clergyman,
he would have had the same right to criticize the speculations
of other authors, on what he calls the Mosaic Cosmogon}- ;
and the conclusion to which he is led does not differ Essay on the
. Mosaic
essentially from one which has been since proposed by Cosmogony,
a clergyman of unimpeached orthodoxy.* Still less would any
one question the right of a clergyman to take a survey of the
" tendencies of religious thought in England " in the last century,
or, as the writer of the Essay on this subject likewise describes
his work, of the Theory of Belief in the Church of Essay on the
England. It may be his own misfortune, as well as the BeSenntho
, Church of
reader's, that his researches should have led him to no England,
more positive result than a suggestion, that it is very difficult to
" make out on what basis Revelation is supposed, by the religious
literature of the present day, to rest," while the general tendency
of the investigation is to raise a doubt whether any of those on
* " Replies to EssayB and Reviews. The Creative Week."
VOL. II. E
no
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
which it has been supposed to rest is sufficiently firm ; and any
one who should look for a hint to supply the defect would be
utterly disappointed. This indeed is quite in accordance with
the principles laid down in the previous Essays, but is not suffi-
cient to charge the author with the responsibility of maintaining
them.
The same remark will apply to the last Essay in the volume. The
Essa onthe SUDjec^ °f ^hich it treats, " the Interpretation of Scrip-
tkm^reta" ture," is indeed of vast range, and in itself of all but the
scripture. very highest importance : but, by the side of those which
are discussed in other parts of the volume, it sinks into compara-
tive insignificance. There may be, and are, wide differences of
opinion as to the inspiration of Scripture, among those who believe
in a supernatural revelation : but for those who reject the possi-
bility of such a revelation, an inquiry as to the nature of inspiration
can have neither interest nor meaning. The view of the question
taken in the Essay may be that which those who reject super-
natural revelation are forced to take : but it does not follow that
the author is by his theory of inspiration at all committed to their
denial of revelation. I have the less occasion to enter into this
question, as I could add nothing to what I stated in a former
Charge, as to its ecclesiastical aspect, and I have seen no reason to
alter any opinion which I there expressed on the subject. We
may well believe that the truth lies somewhere between the
position of those who either altogether reject the existence of a
human element in the Bible, or seek to reduce it to a minimum,
and that of those who deal in the same way with the divine
element. Whether indeed it is possible to draw a line between
these extremes, in which the truth may be found, will depend on
the farther question, whether the two elements are not so inex-
tricably blended together as to forbid the attempt. But so much
is certain, that there is no visible organ of our Church competent
to define that which hitherto has been left undetermined on this
point. I cannot profess to desire that such an organ should be
called into action for such a purpose, or that a new article should
be framed to bind the opinions of the Clergy on this subject, even
CHARGES.
51
if it should only serve — as we have seen proposed with regard to
the rest — to mark a limit which must be kept sacred from direct
impugnment. But I earnestly deprecate all attempts to effect the
same object by means of any authority, legislative or judicial, short
of that which would be universally recognized as rightfully supreme,
because fully representing the mind and will of the whole Church.
Looking at the volume as a whole, I do not understand how
any one reading it with common attention can fail to observe,
notwithstanding the variety of topics and of treatment, that all is
the product of one school. I am not aware, indeed, that this has
ever been disputed, and it would probably be admitted with com-
placency by all the contributors. The only question is Thg sohool
as to the character of the school to which it belongs ; ^^ch the
and that this, so far as it may be inferred from the belongs-
work, is mainly negative, is acknowledged by its warmest and
ablest apologist.* All that can seem doubtful is, how far the
negation extends ; whether that which is rejected is any thing
essential to the Christian faith, or only some things which have
been erroneously deemed such, but are really no more than
excrescences, once perhaps harmless, but now burdensome and
hurtful. Such, no doubt, is the light in which it is viewed by
the authors themselves. I have already stated the grounds on
which I have been led to a very different conclusion ; that the
negation does reach to the very essence and foundation of
Christian faith ; that after the principles laid down in this work
have been carried to their logical result, that which is left will be
something to which the name of Christianity cannot be applied
without a straining and abuse of language. It will be no longer
a religion, and will not yet have become a philosophy. No longer
a religion, because it will contain nothing which is not supposed
to have been originally derived from the processes of unassisted
human reason. Not yet a philosophy, because it will retain
many traditional elements, and will still appeal to authority in
matters on which reason claims a supremacy, which, at the
present stage of the education of the world, can no longer be
* Edinburgh Review, p. 472.
E 2
52
BISHOP THIKLAVALL's
questioned. It will have no right to exist, and will only be
enabled to drag on a precarious, feeble, and barren existence by
the force of custom and other external aids. How long it may
so linger it is impossible to say ; but its final doom, as that of all
that belongs to a mere state of transition, will have been irrevoc-
ably fixed by the nature of things.
The character of a Church must depend on the view
The relation ■L
church to which it takes of its Founder. But the very name of a
its rounder. q^^]^ m ^s received acceptation, implies that it
regards its Founder as distinguished from the rest of mankind in
some peculiar way, by His connexion with the Deity ; as having
in some special sense come forth from God. Otherwise there
would be no distinction between a Church and a School of philo-
sophy. No amount of admiration and reverence which the
disciples of a philosophical school may feel for their Master, not
even if exhibited in periodical commemorative meetings, could
entitle it to the name of a Church, so long as they acknowledge
him to have been nothing more than an extraordinary man. This
being distinctly understood, the case would not be altered, though
in the fervour of their affectionate veneration they should some-
times style him divine. It might well be that in the National
Church of the future foreshadowed in this volume, Jesus might
continue to receive like homage from those who reject the pos-
sibility of a supernatural revelation, or admit it only in a sense in
which the term would be equally applicable to any doctrine taught
in a philosophical school. His human person might be invested with
ideal attributes, independent of its historical reality, but equally
suited to the purpose of an example ; if indeed a mode of influence
which was adapted to the nonage of the world, was any longer
needed or useful in the present period of its education. But that
which, in such a system, He cannot be, is a Teacher of superhuman
authority. His sayings may retain their value, so far as they
commend themselves to the reason and conscience of the readers ;
but that they are His, cannot exempt them from contradiction, or
give them any decisive weight in controversy. Least of all could
He be an object of personal faith. A man of strong though coarse
CHARGES.
53
and narrow mind, an avowed unbeliever, whose only pretence to
the name of Christian, which it was convenient to him not to
renounce, was, as his biographer states, an impertinent assent to
some of Christ's moral precepts,* writing to one who sought his
guidance in his religious inquiries, said, " If you find reason to
believe that Jesus was a God, you will be comforted with the
belief of His aid and His love." t Such comfort of course can
never be enjoyed by those who reject the possibility of super-
natural revelation. Nor can they consistently join in the worship
of one who differs from themselves only as a rare sample of their
common nature. The language in which He is addressed by our
Church would be rank idolatry. In a word their Christology is
one which, to borrow a significant phrase of one of our authors,
will not bear to be prayed.
But though I cannot but regard this book as the production of
a school to which all the contributors belong, I would not _ ,
° How far the
be understood to mean that all of them have followed out ^Jjt'e
its principles to that degree of development which is cipiesof
disclosed in two or three of the Essays. I have endea-
voured to mark as clearly as I could the position in which each
appears to me to stand with regard to it. Most of them probably
would recoil from this extreme as utterly repugnant to their
feelings and convictions. It is possible that hardly one of them
has placed it distinctly before his mind, even while making state-
ments which involve it by the most direct and necessary implica-
tion. These, however, are merely personal considerations, with
which I am not concerned, and to which I advert only to guard
against misunderstanding. The unity of the general tendency is,
I think, too manifest to be fairly denied ; and in two, at least, of
the Essays this tendency has been carried very near indeed to its
* Thomas Jefferson : par Cornelia de Witt, p. 347. " Son pretendu Christianisme
n'allait pas au dela d'une adhesion impertinente a quelques-uns des preceptes
moraux du Christ." At p. 4 he quotes from Jefferson's Works a passage which
illustrates the looseness of this adhesion: "It is not to be understood that I am
with Him (ChristJ in all His doctrines. I am a Materialist ; He takes the side of
spiritualism."
t Jefferson's Memoirs and Correspondence, by Thomas Jefferson Randolph.
Vol. ii. p. 217. Letter to Peter Carr.
54
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
ultimate point both in theory and practice. The theory is perfectly
intelligible in itself, and only not familiar to us in the quarter from
which it has been recently announced. But its practical applica-
tion, in the proposed " adjustment of old things to new conditions,"
is not only startling from its novelty, but one of which happily it
is not easy for us at present to form a clear conception. This,
however, does not prevent it from being highly worthy of our
most serious attention. And we may be in some danger of under-
valuing its significance.
The ideal The ideal sketched in this volume of a National Church,
National
church. without a theology, without a confession, without a creed,
with no other basis of united worship than a system of universal
equivocation, has probably struck many with surprise at its
extravagance. The scheme by which it is to be realized seems to
exhibit an incongruity, almost amounting to direct opposition,
between the means and the end. It aims at the cementing of
religious unity, by a process apparently tending to the most
complete disintegration of all religious communion. It proposes
to attract larger congregations to our services, by extinguishing as
much as possible the devotional element in them, and turning our
churches into lecture-rooms, for the inculcation of ethical common-
place, as to which there is supposed to be no room for any
difference of opinion in the audience. To many it must be a
satisfaction to feel sure that if, in some paroxysm of puhbc delirium,
such a thing was to be set up under the name of a National Church,
it would, even without any outward shock, through its intrinsic
incoherence, very speedily crumble into dust. And so it may be
thought almost a waste of time to dwell upon it. But whatever
may be the merits of the scheme, here is the fact, that it has been
put forth by a clergyman of no mean ability and of considerable
Academical reputation. And then, though among ourselves it is
still only in the state of a crude project, it is not a mere dream.
It has been realized elsewhere. There are Protestant Churches on
the Continent, in which the preachers are not prevented by their
open rejection of the supernatural basis of Christianity, from
solemnizing the Christian festivals by discourses, in which the
CHARGES.
55
idealizing principle fills the place of the historical reality.* It
would, perhaps, be not impossible that a brilliant eloquence might
render such rhetorical exercises attractive to some hearers among
ourselves. For a time, at least, the contrast between the tradi-
tional occasion and the views of the preacher might give a certain
zest to the entertainment ; though few can imagine that, on the
whole and in the long run, such a substitute for the Gospel of
Christ would be found to satisfy either the educated or the
uneducated classes in this country ; still less that it could ever
exert any beneficial influence on their minds and hearts. But we
are not yet generally prepared to entertain such a question. Most
of us think it rather too much, that such a scheme should have
appeared in print under a respectable name. Any proceeding
which looked like the beginning of a movement for carrying it
into effect, would be regarded by the great body of English
Churchmen with suspicion and alarm.
I am therefore not surprised that a proposed amendment of the
Act of Uniformity which, though I believe framed with Proposed
. ™ . • i i • i n amendment
a very different view, might be considered as a nrst of the Act
..... of Uni-
step in this direction, was rejected last session in the formity.
House of Lords by a great majority. I am not aware that any
argument was adduced in behalf of the declaration which it sought
to abolish, considered in itself. Those who wished to preserve it,
did not profess that it was one which they would have adopted, if
it had been then for the first time submitted to deliberation.
* " Predigten aus der Gegenwart." Von D. Carl Schwarz. It is however due
to the author to observe, that the anti-supernaturalistic views, which are so
distinctly avowed in the Preface, are so little obtruded on the hearer in the sermons
themselves, that several of them might easily be mistaken for an expression of the
ordinary Christian belief. In an excellent Essay by Dr. J. J. Prins of Leiden, on
" The Reality of Our Lord's Resurrection from the Dead," I find the interesting
statement (p. 3), that in the General Synod of the Reformed Church of the
Netherlands in 1860, the question was raised, " whether a candidate who denies the
resurrection of Jesus Christ as a historical fact, is admissible into the ministry."
To this question no answer was given by the Synod as a body ; but those of its
members who were charged with the consideration of the question did not hesitate
to declare, each for himself, " that they should not deem themselves competent or
able (dat zij zich nict bevoegd noch in staat zonden achten) to exercise the ministry
of the Gospel in the Reformed Church if they did not believe with all their heart,
that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day."
56
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
Probably every one felt tbat it was indefensible on its own merits.
It was too notoriously a characteristic monument of evil days, on
which Churchmen can look back only with sorrow ; the offspring
of a vindictive spirit, which so far overshot its mark, as to ensure
the defeat of its own object. For, interpreted literally, it would
bind every one who makes it to the opinion that the Prayer Book
is, what no uninspired composition can be, absolutely faultless ;
and in the construction of such a document, the passions of those
who framed it, however notorious, cannot be allowed to determine
its meaning, which, as the mind of the Legislature, must be sup-
posed to be reasonable and just, at least not to involve any thing
manifestly absurd and impracticable. And therefore, though I
should be glad to see it abolished, I believe that the mischief it
has caused, apart from the discredit it has cast on the Church,
has been greatly exaggerated. But, viewed in the light reflected
on it by the proposal we have been considering, it not unnaturally
lost its true colours, and instead of an odious display of sectarian
animosity, and a dark blot on our ecclesiastical legislation, pre-
sented the aspect of a precious safeguard against a danger which
threatens the life of the Church. I can fully understand this
illusion, though I should be loth to share it. For I can never
believe in a necessary connexion between that which is bad and
wrong in itself, and any thing really valuable or sacred, however
long they may have stood side by side. The parasitical bygrowth
does not really support, but, on the contrary, compresses and
weakens the stem to which it clings. In the present case — as was
observed in the debate — there is the less need to retain an inde-
fensible form, as its place might be supplied by another, which
would answer every useful purpose, while free from all reasonable
objection.
The failure of this attempt may serve as a sample of the dif-
ficulty which may be expected to attend the introduction of any
larger measure of a like nature. Those indeed who are most fully
convinced of the importance and necessity of subscription as a
condition of office in the Church, might, notwithstanding, if not
on that very account, most earnestly desire the abolition of a
CHARGES.
particular form which seems to them useless and mischievous.
And therefore the proposal which has been recently _
1 L J Proposal to
made, * to remedy the evils which are supposed to arise evSfof the
from the present state of subscription, by doing away moleofsub-
with all subscription to the Articles and Prayer Book, 8cnptl0U-
and substituting a general declaration and promise of approbation
and conformity, with regard to doctrine, worship, and government,
or discipline of the Church of England, — is not merely one of much
broader scope, but of an essentially different kind, resting upon
altogether distinct grounds. But if it was to be presented for
legislative action, it would most probably have to encounter a still
more determined and general opposition. This however is no
reason why it should not be carefully weighed and calmly dis-
cussed ; though even this is rendered difficult by its apparent
affinity to the suggestions of the writer whose views on this subject
I have set before you. It must, I think, be admitted that sub-
scription to formularies, if it does not answer the purpose for which
it is exacted, is likely to be worse than useless. It is in that case
an unjustifiable restriction of personal freedom, which cannot fail
to be attended with pernicious consequences. It may be discovered
that it never did answer its purpose, or that it does so no longer.
In either case, when the fact is well ascertained, the requirement
ought to cease. Perhaps it may be added, that, in a country
where institutions of every kind are open to unlimited freedom of
discussion, it will inevitably do so sooner or later. The argument
which has been urged in behalf of the declaration which many
wish to see expunged from the Statute Book, that, although it
would have been better if it had never been imposed, yet, having
once been enacted, it must be retained, because its abolition might
be misconstrued into a legislative sanction of unconscientious con-
formity, is one which at the utmost can only have weight so far
as to suggest some easy precaution against such misapprehension.
But, on the other hand, the right and fitness of calling upon those
* " A Letter to the Lord Bishop of London on the State of Subscription in the
Church of England, and in the University of Oxford." By Arthur Penrhyn
Stanley, D.D.
58
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
who are to minister in the Church, to express in some form or
other their assent to the doctrine which is to be the matter of their
teaching, can hardly be denied ; and even the largest measure of
relaxation which has yet been proposed, does not dispense with the
obligation altogether, but only imposes it in a more simple or less
definite form. This very much narrows the question, but not I
think in favour of the proposed innovation. At present I do not
believe that we are sufficiently in possession of the most material
is the exist- facts of the case. It seems to me open to great doubt,
subscription whether the existing state of subscription is fairly
bad and in- „ .
efficacious ? chargeable with the evils which have been imputed to it,
and whether its alleged " inefficacy " has been clearly proved.
As to the first of these points I will only remark that it must
always be extremely difficult, without an intimate acquaintance
with the persons concerned, to ascertain whether those who are
said to have been repelled from Holy Orders by the terms of sub-
scription, would have been able to undertake or to retain the
ministerial office, if no subscription had been required. And with
regard to the second point, it must be observed that although sub-
scription has failed, and must always fail to secure complete
unanimity in all particulars, it does not follow that it has been
inefficacious toward maintaining a general substantial agreement
in matters of doctrine among the clergy. It also deserves to be
considered whether that which it has been proposed to substitute
for the present form of subscription is not liable to the same
objection. It is assumed that persons, who would scruple to sub-
scribe or declare their assent to the Articles and Prayer Book,
would be willing to declare their approbation of the doctrine of the
Church. But surely this can only be if they forget to inquire
where that doctrine is to be found. Unless they are satisfied that
it is not either in the Articles or the Prayer Book, the omission
of these names from the form of subscription will afford no relief
to their scruples, as they would implicitly bind themselves to the
Practice of contents of those formularies just as much as if they were
Noncon- .
formists. expressly designated. Reference has been made, as to
an example in point, to some Nonconformist bodies in which,
CHARGES.
59
though no subscription is required, there is said to be "a marked
unformity of opinion on all important points, though with some
diversity in minor matters." No doubt, a congregation which can
any moment at its pleasure dissolve its connexion with its minister,
can care little about his previous professions of orthodoxy ; as all
know that his teaching will be sure to conform to their opinions,
not only " on all important points," but even in " minor matters "
which happen to interest them. I hardly need observe how
inapplicable this is to the case of a clergyman who has no motive,
but either a sense of duty, or a wish to avoid giving offence, for
adapting his teaching to the sentiments of his hearers. To them,
in proportion to the soundness of their own churchmanship, it
must be a matter of no little interest to know that their pastor
acknowledges a rule of faith in accordance with their own belief.
If we were to look abroad to the condition of the Churches in
which subscription has been either abolished, or retained in a
merely nugatory form, which leaves a boundless latitude of opinion
to the subscriber, we shall not, I believe, if we set any value on
Christianity, be much tempted to imitate their example. If there
are some from which we might gain a lesson, there are far more
which can only serve as a warning. It is true, where the licence
has been carried to the utmost excess, the relaxation of subscription
has been not so much the cause as the sign or the effect. But the
farther we are actually removed from such a state of things, the
more loth should we be either to hasten its approach, or to anti-
cipate any of its results.
I am aware that I have already trenched on the ordinary
limits of a Charge ; and yet I have not touched on „ „. „
° J Publications
the subject which has occupied the attention of the (£^ov of
Church during the last twelve months more than any NataJ'
other : the publications of the Bishop of Natal. In the absence
of any special motive for addressing you earlier on this subject, I
thought it best to wait for the present opportunity ; and I now
gladly avail myself of it to state the reasons which, on more than
one occasion, prevented me from concurring in the course which
the greater part of my Right Reverend brethren thought fit to
60
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
adopt in this matter. On one of these occasions, the ground of
difference was a question, not of principle, but of personal feeling,
which may therefore be dismissed in a very few words. It was
thought that, in the first Part of his work, the author had made
admissions, showing that he was conscious of an inconsistency
between his avowed opinions, and his office in the Church, which
warranted an appeal to his sense of duty, as requiring him to
resign his functions. I was myself under the same impression as
to the meaning of his language. But just on this account I could
not reconcile it with my sense of fitness to j oin in a remonstrance,
which seemed to imply, that the person to whom it was addressed
was deficient either in intelligence or in moral feeling, and which
otherwise must, as it appeared to me, be either superfluous or
unavailing. All the facts of the case were before him, more fully
indeed than they could be before any one else. It was also evident
that the practical question arising out of them was distinctly
present to his mind, and had occupied his most serious attention.
Under such circumstances, I thought that the decision might be
more properly left entirely to himself. It turned out, however,
that the ground on which the appeal was made, was an erroneous
interpretation of his words. He does not admit the alleged incon-
sistency, but regards his position as both legally and morally
tenable. I cannot reconcile this with his previous language : but
as to the fact, that is, the view he takes of his own case, there can
be no farther dispute. Whether that view is the right one, is of
course a totally different question, but one which no private judg-
ment is competent to determine. And although the legal aspect
of the case is distinct from its moral aspect, there is so close a
connexion between them, that the legal right, if ascertained,
would involve a moral right. Only that right might or might
not be exercised rightly. And in this respect, while I cannot but
lament the tone of bitterness in which some have expressed their
disapprobation of the author, if on no other account, because I
believe it can only tend to strengthen his influence among a large
class of readers, I must say that, after every allowance for the
peculiar circumstances of the case, and with all the respect due to
CHARGES.
Ill
his sincerity and earnestness, he appears to me to have laid him-
self open to just censure.
It is true the Church of England not only permits but enjoins
her ministers to search the Scriptures. It is not merely Free inquiry
in the study
their right, but a duty, to which each of them is bound by of Scripture,
his Ordination vows. The purpose indeed for which they are
exhorted to the assiduous cultivation of this study, is entirely
practical. It is partly their own growth in godliness, and partly
the enlargement of their capacity for the discharge of their
pastoral duties ; " that by daily reading and weighing of the
Scriptures, they may wax riper and stronger in their ministry."
A searching of the Scriptures, undertaken with any other ultimate
aim, would be one of those " worldly cares and studies," which
they are charged "as much as they may, to forsake and set aside."
But, apart from the general spirit of this admonition, the Church
has not attempted to fence the study of Scripture, either for
Clergy or laity, with any restrictions as to the subjects of inquiry,
but has rather taught them to consider every kind of information
which throws light on any part of the Sacred volume, as precious,
either for present or possible use. It was therefore in perfect
harmony with the mind of the Church, that the Committee of the
Lower House of Convocation appointed to examine the Bishop of
Natal's book, " desired not to be understood as expressing any
opinion opposed to the free exercise of patient thought and reve-
rent inquiry in the study of the Word of God." But if the
inquiry is to be free, it is impossible consistently to prescribe its
results : especially with regard to matters which in themselves
have no more immediate connexion with Christian doctrine, than
any contents of what is commonly called profane history. It is
indeed possible that the investigation of such matters may be
found to have a bearing on very important points of doctrine, and
may lead the inquirer to conclusions apparently at variance with
the position of a minister of the Church. That may be his
misfortune, but, if truth was his only object, would not be his
fault. Nor, considering the endless variety of minds, can we be
sure that wherever this is the case, it proves that the inquiry
C2
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
was begun with a wrong aim, or conducted in an irreverent
spirit.
But after these admissions have been carried to the utmost ex-
tent, there remain grounds on which, as it seems to me, the
Church has reason to complain of the course taken by
church's the Bishop of Natal in the publication of his researches.
grounds of A *
a^stthe H-e was himself fully aware that it could not fail to be
Bishop. attended with consequences which he deplored. Perhaps
he hardly appreciated the full extent of the evil, as well as enor-
mously overrated the benefit which he expected to arise from it.
But undoubtedly that which, above all things beside, gave
currency to the work, was the apparent contrast between its
contents and the author's official position. From the nature of
the subject, not one reader in a hundred could be qualified to form
a really independent conclusion on the reasoning itself. But
there was one palpable fact manifest to all : that a Bishop was
announcing opinions contrary to those which were generally
received in the Church, and likely to subject him to much obloquy
and ill-will. It would therefore be taken for granted by many
who had no other means of judging, that he had not only been
urged by the love of truth, but that opinions which nothing but a
love of truth could have led him to promulge, must be well
founded. This was in some degree an unavoidable evil. He
could not limit the circulation of his work to those who were able
to appreciate the force of his arguments, and not in danger of
being misled by his authority. In his own judgment, indeed, this
inevitable mischief will be more than counterbalanced by the
benefit which he anticipates from the publication, and when he
assures us that his own reverence for Holy "Writ is not abated by
the discovery that it is full of pious frauds and forgeries, we are
bound to believe an assertion relating to something which can be
known only to himself. But when he would persuade us that
Scripture will gain in general estimation, in proportion as such a
view of it is commonly received,* this is a paradox as to which
* Part I., p. xxxiv. The object of the book is " to secure for the Biblo its due
honour and authority ;" and Part II., p. 381.
CHARGES.
G3
we may well remain incredulous. But at least this conviction
could not exempt him from the duty of doing all in his power to
lessen the evil which he foresaw, and of guarding, as far as he
could, against hasty judgments, which with many might shake
the foundation of their faith, and of their whole moral being. The
course which he has actually taken seems to me that which tended
most to aggravate this danger.
There may be cases in which it is not only perfectly allowable,
but expedient to publish the results of a literary or scientific
investigation in successive parts. The criticism which they
undergo in the intervals of the publication may modify the author's
views and contribute to the improvement of the work. But in
the present case such a mode of proceeding could only Effects of his
i • i '-!•!>• • i mode of
lessen its value, and increase the mischief it might cause, publication.
One effect was to bring it into the hands of a larger number of
such readers as were most likely to suffer injury from it. Another
was to deprive it of the advantage it might have derived from a
more mature study of the whole subject. This the author himself
perceived ; but unhappily was so feebly impressed by this con-
sideration, that he allowed it to be outweighed by a motive of
temporary convenience, which, in a matter of such importance,
was hardly worth a serious thought.* Another effect still more
to be deplored was that the premature publication of his first
views entirely altered and almost reversed his own position with
regard to them. The controversy which it could not fail to stir,
as it imposed on him the part of a disputant, rendered it hardly
possible for him to retain the character of a perfectly impartial
and disinterested inquirer after truth. If he had committed him-
self to statements which maturer reflection might have induced
him to modify, he could no longer do so without a sacrifice of
self-love, of which few men are capable, and was thus exposed to
a temptation, which those who have the best reason to trust them-
selves would perhaps most anxiously avoid. Still more The tone of
. . .his lan-
open to censure is, as I think, the tone in which s^ee-
he has announced his conclusions ; one which could hardly
* Part I. Preface, p. xxxii.
64
BISHOP THIRTi WALLAS
have been more confident if he had been favoured with a Divine
revelation,* and which too often seems to indicate a mind so
pre-occupied with a foregone conclusion, as to be incapable of
viewing the subject from more than one side, and that unhappily
the side directly opposed to his earlier and more natural prepos-
sessions. The impression left on the unlearned or half- learned
reader is, that these conclusions not only express the decided con-
viction of one whose station lends extraordinary weight to such
opinions, but that they do not admit of fair or reasonable doubt,
and may safely be taken for granted as " self-evident truth," t
which can only be questioned through ignorance or bad faith.
Unhappily a very large class of his readers were sure to be
satisfied with this result, and would not care, even if they had the
means, to know what might be said on the other side, and whether
alleged " absolute impossibilities " might not turn out to be
merely very difficult historical problems, capable of diverse con-
jectural solutions, though, for want of sufficient data, of none
which leave no room for doubt. The author had been reminded
by a judicious friend,+ that " we should be very scrupulous about
assuming that it is impossible to explain satisfactorily this or that
apparent inconsistency, contradiction, or other anomaly." But he
has neither been himself sufficiently on his guard against this
error, nor taken due care to inculcate the requisite caution on
those of his readers who most needed it. They are not warned of
the obscurity of the subject, of the relative scantiness of the
historical data, of the constant danger of confounding the accuracy
of arithmetical calculations with that of the premisses on which
they are based. Difficulties are magnified into "plain impossi-
bilities ; " seeming discrepancies into direct contradictions. What-
ever is narrated so as to raise such difficulties, is pronounced
" unhistorical." This term, indeed, is explained so as not to
involve a charge of " conscious dishonesty " against the writer,
* Part II., "p. 371. " It is not I who require you to abandon the ordinary
notion of the Mosaic authorship and antiquity of the Pentateuch. It is the Truth
itself which does so." And again p. 380, " Whatever is done, it is not 7, but the
Truth itself, which does it."
f Part I., p. xxxiii. J Part I., p. xvii.
CHARGES.
65
but the qualification loses much of its value, when it turns out that
the absence of " conscious dishonesty " only means the obtuseness
of his moral sense, which prevented him from feeling that there
was any thing dishonest in a pious fraud.*
These, however, are questions which only affect the responsi-
bility of an individual ; and whatever harm may have been done
by his indiscretion, if there was nothing more in the case, it could
not be a subject of permanent public interest. That which alone
concerns the Church in this matter is the character of that which
has been published by one of her chief pastors, in its The
relation to her doctrine. Whether, and in what writings in
... relation to
degree or proportion, the book contains truth or error, thedoc-
° 1 r ... trinesofthe
is, except so far as her doctrine is involved, a purely church,
literary question, which may and must be left to the tribunal of
literary criticism. The author regards his own ecclesiastical
position as impregnable. That is a point on which I am quite
incompetent to pronounce, and am not called upon to express an
opinion. But his position might be legally secure, and yet be one
which subjected him to the charge of inconsistency and unfaith-
fulness. And this is a question so intimately connected with the
character of the Church itself, as fully to deserve all the attention
that has been paid to it. Perhaps I might have said that it
deserves a great deal more. For when I compare the amount of
discussion which has been bestowed on the book in the historical
or critical point of view, with that which has been applied to its
theological quality, without saying that there has been too much
* Part I., p. xvii. The comparison with Homer and the "early Roman
annalists" misses just the most material point of the case. If the poet or the
annalists had invented a story with the deliberate intention of introducing or
recommending a religious innovation, however the end may be thought to sanctify
the means, they could not be acquitted of an "intention to deceive." But with
regard to them there is no reason to believe that they " practised " such a " decep-
tion ;" while the Bishop's hypothesis distinctly attributes it to Samuel (II., p. 263).
His act would he none the better though a heathen had done the like. It might be
very much the worse, inasmuch as it was not a heathen who did it. But it is
difficult to believe that, if the Bishop's work had not been published in successive
parts, we could have read in Part I., p. xvii, that, "the writer of the story did not
mean it to be received as historically true," and afterwards (II., p. 263) that he
wrote " the account of the revelation to Moses in E. iii.," " with the view of
accounting for the origin of the Name."
VOL. II. F
60
Bisnor tiiiruwall's
of the one, I must think that there has been far too little of the
other. Strictly speaking I can hardly say that, of the theological
kind, there has been any at all. Its place has been filled, as far
as I am aware, by nothing but unverified statements and arbitrary
assumptions. It was expected that Convocation, which met when
the excitement caused by the publication of the first part of the
work was at its height, would address itself to this subject, and in
both Houses it was generally regarded as the most important to
which their attention could be called. It was thought, indeed, by
some that the reason which had led the Upper House to suspend
its proceedings in the case of the Essays and Bevicics, applied to
this, and that it was not desirable to forestall the decision of a
question in which personal interests were involved, when it was
likely to be brought ere long before another tribunal. It was,
however, decided that a Committee of the Lower House should be
appointed to examine and report on the contents of the work ;
and thus its theological character was submitted to the scrutiny
of a select number of eminent Divines.
_ „ „ This is the second occasion, since the revival of Con-
The action of '
onThe^sub^ vocation, on which it has undertaken to express an
opinion on books. It is an exercise of its functions
which had probably not entered into any one's mind at the time
of that revival, and was certainly never expressly included among
the objects for the sake of which the revival was sought, still less
contemplated by those from whom, notwithstanding much oppo-
sition, it was obtained. There were strong reasons, suggested
partly by the past history of Convocation, partly by the spirit of
modern times, which rendered it more than ever desirable that
the newly-recovered liberty should be both sparingly and cau-
tiously used ; never without urgent occasion, and always within
the measure marked by the nature of the end proposed. The
urgency of the occasion must depend, partly on the character
of the book, and partly on the special circumstances of the case.
It will probably be generally admitted, that Convocation would be
lowering its dignity, if it were to assume the office of a literary
critic, and to pronounce censure on defects of taste, or judgment,
CHARGES.
67
or reasoning, or of any thing- extrinsic to the proper domain of
theology. But, even within that domain, there is much that docs
not properly come within the province of Convocation. There
may be a great deal of very bad, unsound divinity, crude theories,
rash speculations, erroneous opinions, such as, if developed into
their ultimate issues, might even be found at variance with
fundamental truths, which, nevertheless, Convocation neither need
nor ought to notice. It appears to me that whatever error it
does undertake to deal with, should be such as at once touches the
foundation, and lies very near to the surface ; in other words,
that its action in the censure of books should be confined to cases
in which clergymen have either directly, or by plain implication,
impugned the doctrine of the Churcli as universally admitted to
be laid down in her Formularies. No mistake which Convocation
could commit, could be more disastrous to its credit and usefulness,
or more imperil its very existence, than if it should attempt to
circumscribe the freedom of opinion sanctioned by the Church by
any new determination of its own, or should identify itself with
any religious party, and endeavour to make its views the standard
of orthodoxy. On the other hand it may seem superfluous to
observe, that the judgments of such a body should be delivered in
precise and unequivocal terms.
The Judgment of Convocation, founded on the Report of the
Committee of the Lower House, is memorable as the first First judg-
ment since
which it has pronounced since its revival. The doubt its revival,
which was felt whether it was advisable to take any action at all
in the matter, though it was not allowed to prevent the passing of
a censure, was permitted to determine the form in which the
censure was expressed. I rejoice that it did so. Though I think
that, if nothing more was to be said, it would have been better to
have been silent, I am thankful that nothing more was said. But
the form of the censure seems to betray the influence of a persua-
sion, which I fear has but very slight foundation in fact. It is
natural that the members of Convocation, who take a lively interest
and an active part in its proceedings, should be apt to overrate
the importance attached to them out of doors, and the impression
f 2
68
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
which they make on public opinion. There may have been a
time when its authority in religious controversies was generally
acknowledged, and the simple declaration of its judgment, unac-
companied by any statement of the grounds on which it rested,
was sufficient to ensure universal acquiescence. But such a state
of things, if it ever existed, belongs to the remote past. We live
in a generation which has but lately become familiar with the
name of Convocation, and in which it is not always associated with
feelings of submissive veneration and unquestioning confidence.
There are some who regard it with distrust and aversion. Others
watch it as an institution on its trial. Many, no doubt, look to
it with respect, sympathy, and hope. But I believe that its
warmest friends are aware that its credit and influence must
depend, not on a time-honoured name, or conventional epithets,
but on the character of its proceedings, and that these will be sub-
mitted to the same free examination, to which among us all
matters of public interest are subject. Nor would they wish it to
be otherwise. The Resolution by which the Bishop of Natal's
book was condemned, assumes a paternal authority which rather
suits an earlier period in the education of the world ; and it pre-
supposes a childlike docility and obedience in those over whom it
is exercised, which are now very rarely to be found. It also
suggests the question, what practical purpose it was designed to
answer. Two were indicated in the Committee's Report, — " the
effectual vindication of the truth of God's Word before men," and
" the warning and comfort of Christ's people."* But it is not
clear how either of these objects could be attained by a declaration,
that the book " involves errors of the gravest and most dangerous
character." Both seem to require that the censure should have
pointed out the errors involved, or have stated the doctrines which
the book had at least indirectly impugned, so as to make it clear
* How widely different an impression it has made on some minds, may be
gathered from a paper in Macmillan's Magazine for Jul}', 1863, where the writer,
who describes himself as a " Lay Churchman," speaking of the Report of the Lower
House, observes : " No friend of the Church of England can read it without shame
and sorrow :" rot without assigning reasons for his assertion. What is saddest in
this is : " talia nobis et dici potuisse, et non potuisse refelli."
CHARGES.
69
that the alleged errors affected, not merely prevalent opinions, but
truths universally recognized as part of the Church's creed.
To me, indeed, it appears that whenever Convocation undertakes
to pronounce on a theological work, its judgment should ^ j dg
be dogmatical, containing some definite theological pro- ™™*0°cfation
position. Otherwise, it may convey an expression of
feeling which is not required, and perhaps in such X^dbe
a case would better be suppressed, while it withholds doematcaL
the one thing really wanted, a declaration of distinct opinion on
the teaching which it condemns. In the present case the vague-
ness of the judgment was the more remarkable, because the
attention of Convocation had been specially drawn to certain pro-
positions, extracted from the substance of the book, which appeared
to the Committee to "involve errors of the gravest and most
dangerous character ; " and the Judgment, taking no notice of
these propositions, applies the same description to the whole book,
and was thus the more likely to disappoint and perplex those who
might look to it for some kind of guidance, or means of discrimi-
nating between truth and error. I cannot consider this as an
auspicious inauguration of the revived judicial action of Convoca-
tion. But still, as I have said, it seems to me to afford matter
for deep thankfulness, so far as the Upper House abstained from
pronouncing on the propositions to which its attention had been
drawn. It was infinitely better that it should confine itself to
generalities, of doubtful meaning and little practical worth, than
that it should have undertaken to dogmatize on those propositions.
According to the view which I have ventured to take of the
proper limits of synodical action in the cognizance of books, the
Committee overstept those limits. They were appointed to
examine the parts which had then appeared of the Bishop's work,
and to report " whether any, and, if any, what opinions heretical
or erroneous in doctrine were contained in it." They extracted
three propositions which they characterized as we have seen. All
that they say beside might, indeed, have entered into a contro-
versial discussion of the work. But this was something foreign
to the business with which they were charged. It was, not to
70
BISHOP TII1KLW ALL'S
refute any errors which they might find in the book — a task which
probably no one would have thought of assigning to such a
number of persons, however well qualified each of them might be
for it individually — but to mark the character of the opinions
contained in it with reference to the standards of the Church's
doctrine. To inquire whether they were tenable or not in them-
selves, was here wholly beside the purpose. Yet this is really all
that is done in the Report.
It may seem indeed as if the Committee, in their mode
How the , J
comimttee 0f dealing with the first of the propositions which they
£st^ropo-s c^e or extract for censure, had shown that they were
aware of the precise nature of the function they had to
perform, and meant to confine themselves to it. That proposition
is — " the Bible is not itself God's Word." The author himself
immediately adds, " But assuredly • God's Word ' will be heard in
the Bible, by all who will humbly and devoutly listen for it." Of
this qualification the Committee, in their remarks on the propo-
sition, take no notice whatever. But they first observe that the
proposition, as they cite it, "is contrary to the faith of the universal
Church, which has always taught that Holy Scripture is given by
inspiration of the Holy Ghost." They seem to have overlooked
that this statement, however true, was irrelevant ; but they then
proceed to refer to the Articles and Formularies of our own
Church, which are, indeed, the only authority binding on her
ministers. But unfortunately not one of the passages to which
they refer applies to the proposition condemned. Many, indeed,
among them do clearly describe the Bible as the Word of God.
But not one affirms that "the Bible is itself God's Word."
Before the negative of this statement could be shown to be con-
trary to the language of our Articles and Formularies, it was
necessary either to prove or take for granted that the addition
itself in no way affected the sense of the proposition. This,
however, being a matter depending entirely on the author's
intention, did not admit of proof. But, for the same reason, it
could not safely or justly (for the purpose of a solemn censure) be
taken for granted. No doubt the expression indicated that the
CHARGES.
71
author made a distinction between the Bible and the Word of
God, and considered the two terms as not precisely equivalent
or absolutely interchangeable. But if he affixed a meaning to
the term Word of God, according to which it might be truly said,
that the Bible was not itself that Word, this — even if the propo-
sition had stood by itself without any qualification — would not
imply a denial, that there may be another sense in which the
Bible is truly described as the Word of God. And there is
certainly high authority for the distinction. Among the numerous
passages of the New Testament in which the phrase, the Meanin& of
Word of God, occurs, there is not one in which it signi- "^'woni
fies the Bible, or in which that word could be substituted of 0 '
for it without manifest absurdity. But even in our Articles and
Formularies there are several in which the two terms do not
appear to be treated as synonymous. The expressions, " God's
Word written" (Art. XX.), "ministering God's Word" (Art.
XXXVII.), "dispenser of God's Word" (Ordinal for Friests),
"hinderer or slanderer of God's Word" (Office of Holy Com-
munion), seem to point to the New Testament use rather than to
the Biblical record ; and, at least, there can be no doubt as to the
meaning in the Collect for St. Bartholomew's Day, where the
prayer is, that God, who " gave the Apostle grace truly to believe
and preach his Word," " would grant unto His Church to love
that Word which he believed, and both to preach and receive the
same." When you, my brethren, preach the Word of God, it
may happen that your text is the only portion of the Bible which
you quote : and though even your text should not be taken from
one of the Gospels, you might not feel the less sure that it is the
Gospel which you preach. That which you preach would not,
indeed, be the Gospel or the Word of God, unless it was agreeable
to God's Word written. But there may be substantial agreement
without literal identity, which would confound the offices of read-
ing and of preaching. If the Word of God is to be found
nowhere but in Holy Writ, not only could no other Christian
literature be properly called sacred, but the Bible itself would be
degraded to a dead and barren letter, and would not be a living
72
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
spring of Divine ti'uth. On the whole, the Report first attaches
an arbitrary meaning to an ambiguous expression, and then
charges it with contradicting authorities, which are either wholly
silent upon it, or seem to countenance and warrant it. The appeal
to the faith and constant teaching of the universal Church is not
only, as I observed, irrelevant to a question of Anglican ortho-
doxy, but introduces a topic which is by no means necessarily
involved in the proposition — the inspiration of Holy Scripture ;
and a reader who did not verify the references, might easily be
led to imagine that they contain some declaration of our own
Church on that subject. Yet all they do contain that bears upon
it, is the frequent application of the description Word of God to
the Bible. Our Church has never attempted to determine the
nature of the inspiration of Holy Scripture ; and whether such a
determination is desirable or not, no friend to Convocation woidd
wish to see it undertake a task of such perilous moment, and so
far beyond its legitimate province.
But in their treatment of the next proposition, the
Treatment r r '
second pro- Committee seem almost entirely to have lost sight of the
position. principle which, although misapplied, appeared to guide
them in their examination of the first. For, with a single in-
significant exception, they confront it, not with our Articles and
Formularies, but with passages of Scripture. Quotations from
Scripture may add great weight to a theological argument ; they
are essential for the establishment of any doctrine of a Church
which professes to ground its teaching on Scripture ; but they are
entirely out of place where the question is, not whether a doctrine
is true or false, but whether it is the doctrine of the Church of
England. Some years ago the Venerable Person who was Chair-
man of this Committee, and is believed to have had the chief
share in the framing of its Report, was charged with the publica-
tion of unsound doctrine with regard to the Sacrament
Arguments °
textsI1ofdon °f the Lord's Supper. In those proceedings, though
Mnartm£- they affected his civil rights, and but for a technical
81 W defect might have subjected him to penal consequences,
the Court refused to listen to a plea set up in his defence,
CHARGES.
73
grounded on texts of Scripture. The principle of that refusal has
since been repeatedly affirmed by the highest judicial authority.
It was briefly, but clearly, laid down by the Judicial Committee
of the Privy Council in the following terms : — " In investigating
the justice of such a charge we are bound to look solely to the
Statute and the Articles. It would be a departure from our duty
if we were to admit any discussion as to the conformity or non-
conformity of the Articles of Religion, or any of them, with the
Holy Scriptures." And in the more recent case of the " Essays
and Reviews," the Judge, commenting on that opinion, observed,
" "Were I once to be tempted from the Articles and other parts of
the Formularies, the Court could assign no limit to its investiga-
tions ; it would inevitably be compelled to consider theological
questions, not for the purpose of deciding whether they were
conformable to a prescribed standard, but whether the positions
maintained were reconcilable with Scripture or not. Against
pursuing such a course as this, the reasons are many, and in my
judgment overwhelmingly strong." And after stating them he
says, " I will not be tempted, in the trial of any accusation against
a clergyman, to resort to Scripture as the standard by which the
doctrine shall be measured." This is no legal refine-
° Soundness
ment, but a plain dictate of common sense ; and it does oftherule-
not at all depend on the composition of the tribunal before which
such questions are tried ; so as to be less applicable if the Court
consisted entirely of ecclesiastics. On one supposition only would
such a plea be admissible, that is, if the Judge was acknowledged
to possess the authority of an infallible oracle in the interpretation
of Scripture. Otherwise there could be no security, that an argu-
ment from Scripture which to some minds appeared perfectly
convincing, might not seem to others miserably weak, or utterly
worthless. I should think it a great misfortune to the Church if
Convocation, sitting in judgment on the orthodoxy of a theological
work, though without any view to proceedings against the author,
should ignore and practically reject that principle. And if in
this respect the Report betrays the influence of a personal pre-
possession, which, however natural, ought not to be allowed to
74
BISHOP TUIRLWALL'S
sway the decisions of a grave assembly, above all, so as to bring
them into conflict with the highest legal authorities of the realm,
we have the more reason to rejoice, that it did not obtain the
sanction of the Upper House.
When I look at the Scriptural arguments adduced in the Report
against the second proposition extracted for condemnation, they
do not seem to me of such a quality as to deserve to form an
exception, if any could be admitted, to the rule which would
The author- exclude them from such an investigation. The proposi-
shipofthe , ° r r
Pentateuch, tion is, " that not Moses but Samuel, and other persons
of a later age, composed the Pentateuch." It would perhaps have
been better not to have brought the negative and positive substance
of the book thus together, as the hypothesis about Samuel is, for
the purpose of the inquiry, quite immaterial, except as denying
the Mosaic authorship ; and the argument of the Report is
entirely confined to that denial. But upon this the Committee
observe, " that Moses is spoken of, by our Blessed Lord in the
Gospel, as the writer of the Pentateuch." I suspect that even a
layman, little acquainted with the manifold aspects of the ques-
tion, and the almost infinite number of surmises which have been
or may be formed concerning it, would be somewhat disappointed,
when he found that the proof of this statement consists of three
passages, in which our Lord speaks of Moses and the prophets, of
the Law of Moses, and of writings of Moses. It is true that it
would not be a fatal objection to the argument, that the word
Pentateuch does not occur in the Bible. It might have been so
described as to connect every part of its contents with the hand of
Moses, as distinctly as if the observation of the Committee had
been Literally true. But in fact this is not the case ; and still
less is any such distinct appropriation to bo found in any of the
passages cited by the Committee in support of their assertion, that
" Moses is recognized as the writer of the Pentateuch in other
passages of Holy Scripture," They are neither more nor less
conclusive than the language of the seventh Article, to which the
Committee confine all the reference they have made to the judg-
ment of the Church on this question, though this was the only
CHARGES.
75
matter into which it was their proper business to inquire. The
Article alludes to " the law given from God by Moses ; " a slender
foundation for any inference as to the record of that law, much
more as to the authorship of other parts of the Pentateuch ;
especially as the name of Moses does not occur in the enumeration
of the Canonical Books in the sixth Article. If the question had
been as to the authorship of the book of Psalms, few persons
probably would think that it had been dogmatically decided by
the Church, because in the Prayer Book the Psalter is described
as "the Psalms of David." Similarly and equally inconclusive
appear to me the passages cited in proof of the observation, " that
there are portions of the Pentateuch to which our Blessed Lord
refers as being parts of the books of Moses, the Mosaic authorship
of which is expressly denied in the Bishop's book."
The third proposition, " variously stated in the book," relates to
the historical truth of the Pentateuch, which the author _ . .
Third pro-
denies ; not in the sense that every thing in it is pure the wsto-on
fiction, but that all is not historically true.* Of the fact "me ?en-
with which he is charged there can be no doubt ; and
it was superfluous to give instances of that which he has expressly
stated in general terms. But it is to be regretted that the Com-
mittee should again have lost sight of the object for which they
were appointed, and have omitted to refer to any doctrine of the
Church which the author has contradicted. This was the more
incumbent on them, since a recent Judgment has formally sanc-
tioned a very wide latitude in this respect. It is clear that in
such things there cannot be two weights and two measures for
different persons, and also that it does not belong to any but legal
authority to draw the line by which the freedom, absolutely
granted in theory, is to be limited in practice. The author's
scepticism appears to me, as to many others, very rash and wild.
But that was not the question before Convocation. It was
* Part II., p. 372. The value, however, of the admission is not very great, since
it is supposed that Samuel's materials consisted entirely of " legendary recollec-
tions," which wore so dim and vague as to leave even the existence of Moses open
to doubt. P. 376 (where Ewald's credulous dogmatism is gently rebuked by a note
of interrogation) and p. 185.
76
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
whether, or how far, such scepticism had been forbidden by the
Church. And on this, the only point which required their atten-
tion, the Committee are totally silent.
These are the propositions which they extract as " the main
propositions of the book," which, though not pretending to " pro-
nounce definitively whether they are or are not heretical," they
denounce as " involving errors of the gravest and most dangerous
Fourth pro- character." But they proceed to cite a further proposi-
position. tion, which the author states in the form of a question,
to meet an objection which had been raised against his main
conclusion, as virtually rejecting our Lord's authority, by which,
as the Committee state, " the genuineness and the authenticity of
tbe Pentateuch have been guaranteed to all men." "Whether the
passages in which our Lord quotes or alludes to the Pentateuch,
amount to such a guarantee, is a point which they do not discuss.
They only observe that the proposition " questions our Blessed
Lord's Divine Knowledge," and with that remark they drop the
subject.
Considering that this proposition is incomparably the most
important of all that they cite, and that whatever importance the
its relation others possess depends ultimatelv on the connexion
to the \ r •*
others. mf0 ^vliich they may be brought with it, one is sur-
prised that it should have been dismissed with so very cursory
and imperfect a notice. For it is not even clear that it correctly
expresses the author's meaning. The question which he raises
does not properly concern our Lord's Divine Knowledge, that is,
„ „ the knowledge belonging to His Divine nature. It is,
Definition 0 ° °
ofthe^ue^- whether His human knowledge was co-extensive with
tion raised. ^g j)^ne Omniscience. It is obvious at the first glance,
what a vast field of speculation, theological and metaphysical, is
opened by this suggestion. And perhaps a little reflection would
satisfy every one capable of appreciating the difficulties which beset
the inquiry, that the subject is not only one of the most abstruse
with which the human mind can be engaged, but that it lies beyond
the reach of our faculties, and is one of those mysteries which are
to be embraced by faith, not to be investigated by reason. If any
CHARGES.
77
one thinks that he is able to explain the mode in which the opera-
tions of our Lord's human nature were affected by His Godhead, or
to distinguish between that which belonged to the integrity of His
manhood, to the extraordinary gifts with which He was furnished
for His work, and again to the proper attributes of Deity, he is of
course at liberty to make the experiment, but should not be
surprised if his solution satisfies none but himself. Bishop Jeremy
Taylor observes : " They that love to serve God in hard questions,
use to dispute whether Christ did truly or in appearance only
increase in wisdom. For being personally united to the Word,
and being the eternal wisdom of the Father, it seemed to them
that a plenitude of wisdom was as natural to the whole person as
to the Divine nature. But others, fixing their belief upon the
words of the story, which equally affirms Christ as properly to
have increased in favour with God as with man, in wisdom as in
stature, they apprehend no inconvenience in affirming it to belong
to the verity of human nature, to have degrees of understanding
as well as of other perfections : and although the humanity of
Christ made up the same person with the Divinity, yet they
think the Divinity still to be free, even in those communications,
which were imparted to his inferior nature ; and the Godhead
might as well suspend the emanation of all the treasures of wisdom
upon the humanity for a time, as he did the beatific vision, which
most certainly was not imparted in the interval of his sad and
dolorous passion." * It is clear to which side Taylor inclines.
But I must own that I should be sorry to see these " hard
questions " revived, as I am persuaded that there could not be a
less acceptable " service to God," or a less profitable exercise of
learning and acuteness. Still more should I deprecate any
attempt of the Church of England to promulge a new dogma for
the settlement of this controversy. And I lament that the
Committee of the Lower House should have expressed themselves
as if either there was no " dispute " on the subject, or it belonged
to them to end it by a word. But at least, as their remark
indicated, that the Bishop had, in their judgment, fallen into
* Life of Christ. Works, ed. Heber, ii. p. 142.
78
BISHOP TIIIRL WALL'S
some grave error, it was due, not only to him, but to the readers
of their Report, and to the Church at large, that they should have
pointed out what the error was, by a comparison with the doctrine
of the Church which it was supposed to contradict,
omissions Little as I am satisfied with the contents of the
of the
Report Report, I think there is no less ground for surprise at
its omissions. Since the Committee felt themselves at liberty to
animadvert, not only on the propositions extracted from the book,
but on its general spirit and tendency, it might have been ex-
pected that they would omit nothing worthy of special notice, as
serving to mark its peculiar character. Yet, while they hold up
to reprobation the results of purely historical investigations,
because in their opinion at variance with doctrines of the Church,
which however it is left to the reader's sagacity to discover, they
pass over in silence passages which, however they may admit of a
different explanation, appear in their most obvious sense irre-
concilable with the admission of a supernatural revelation. An
eminent writer of the last century, who may be called the father
of German rationalism, startled his contemporaries by the asser-
tion, that as religion was before the Bible, so it might continue to
subsist though the Bible should be lost. * It has been questioned
whether in this proposition the religion meant was Christianity or
Natural Religion. In the former sense the proposition was an
idle surmise, which it was impossible to verify. But in the latter
sense, it was admitted that it could be only understood as treating
Christianity as no more than a form of natural religion, t The
* So the proposition is stated by Gurlitt in the Theologische Studien und
Kritiken, 1863, p. 763. Mr. Farrar, in his Bampton Lectures on the History of
Free Thought, p. 319, states a different proposition to the like effect: "that, as
Christianity existed before the New Testament, so it could exist after it." There
may be here, either a misprint, of after instead of without, or an omission of the
words was lost at the end. Each of these statements no doubt expresses Lessing's
meaning, though neither accurately reports his words. His fifth axiom is : " Re-
ligion existed before the Bible." The sixth : " Christianity existed before Evan-
gelists and Apostles had written." The eighth : " If there was a period in which
the Christian religion was widely spread, though, not a letter of all that has come
down to us on the subject had yet been written, it must be possible that all the
writings of the Evangelists and Apostles should be lost, and the religion which they
taught still subsist."
t Gurlitt, u. s>.
CHARGES.
79
Bishop of Natal consoles himself for the "serious consequences "
which he " painfully forebodes " as likely to ensue in many cases
from the publication of his book, by this reflection : — " Our belief
in the living God remains as sure as ever, though not the Penta-
teuch only, but the whole Bible, were removed." " The light of
God's love did not shine less truly on pious minds, when Enoch
walked with God of old, though there was then no Bible in
existence, than it does now." * What kind of religion it is that
would thus survive the loss of the Bible, seems, as far as Eeiigion
. without the
the words go, hardly to admit of a doubt. It may be Bible,
called Christianity ; but hardly in any other sense than that in
which a deistical writer of the last century entitled one of his
works, " Christianity as old as the Creation."
It is indeed, in the author's view, a revealed religion ; but so
was that which he finds expounded in a passage of In what
6CI1S6 it'-
Cicero, in the confession of the Sikh-Gooroos, and in the veaied.
ejaculations of an Indian mystic. Their pure deism was, he doubts
not, " revealed to them by the same Divine Teacher," who spake
by prophets and apostles, t If there was no special revelation in
Christianity, such statements would be not only conformable to
the Apostle's teaching, that " every good gift comes down from
the Father of lights," but also relevant to the case, and of great
practical importance, as either showing the needlessness of Chris-
tian missions, or at least preventing them from assuming a
character to which they are not entitled. But if there was such
a special Christian revelation, it is difficult to see either the
appropriateness or the practical use of the remark. The author
indeed intimates his " entire and sincere belief in our Lord's
divinity ;" + and this must silence all doubt as to his orthodoxy on
that head ; but as he does not profess to view any of the founders
of other religions in the same light, it might have been expected
that he would have explained how that belief is to be reconciled
with language which seems to place all religions, which acknow-
ledge the being and unity of God, with regard to their divine
origin, on the same level. The apparent sense of that language is
* Part L, p. 12. t Part I., p. 155. t Part I., p. xxxi.
80
Bisnop thirlwall's
also the only one that is clearly consistent with his anticipations
of a coming happier time, when " missionaries of the Jewish
race," as soon as they have " given up the story of the Pentateuch
as a record of historical fact," shall go forth, to co-operate with
our own as " heralds of salvation, proclaiming with free utterance
the name of the living God." * It is in perfect harmony with
this sense, but not with any other which the words readily
suggest, that he looks forward to changes at home, by which " the
system of our Church is to be reformed," and her boundaries at
the same time enlarged, so as " to make her what a National
Church should be, the mother of spiritual life to all within the
realm, embracing, as far as possible, all the piety, and learning,
and earnestness, and goodness, of the nation." f This hint indeed
is so vague, that it would have been difficult to gather its precise
import, if the Essay, of which I have already spoken, in which a
like view of the National Church is more fully developed, and the
conditions of the proposed reform more distinctly explained, did
not furnish a commentary, and relieve me from the necessity of
making any further observation upon it.
Remarks on I do not know how many of you, my brethren, may
the study of
the work. have found leisure for the study or even for the reading
of the work I have been considering. Possibly if you happened
to have learnt that its results are almost entirely negative, and
that as to those of a more positive kind the author appears to have
convinced no one but himself, not even foreign critics who
willingly accept his arguments on the destructive side ; + some of
you might think, not unreasonably, that their time might be more
profitably spent than in following the course of such a barren
inquiry, and that it was better to wait until it should have yielded
some amount of generally-recognized positive truth. If, however,
you chose to judge of the book for yourselves, and did not allow
yourselves to be deterred from the examination of its contents by
the opinion that the Church had forbidden an investigation which
presupposed that there was room for doubt on the subject, though
* Part II., p. 384. t Part L, p. xxxv.
X Among tho latest see Kamphausen in Theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1863, p. 795.
CHARGES.
81
you might soon see ground to suspect that the author must, from
the peculiar turn of his mind, be a very unsafe guide wherever
there was need of the higher faculties required for the study of
obscure periods of ancient history, you would nevertheless find
proofs of no mean sceptical acuteness, and much specious reasoning,
to which you might not be able readily to devise even a possible
answer. This with you might not be enough to extort an absolute
assent to that which you felt yourselves unable to refute ; but it
would probably induce you to read some of the replies, in which,
as is stated in the Report of the Committee of the Lower House
of Convocation, " the difficulties propounded by the author have
been fairly discussed." From several of these replies you could
not fail to gain much valuable information. You would find
many things placed in an entirely different light from that in
which they had been first set before you. In most cases the con-
ditions on which the author's objections are founded, would appear
to be by no means so simple or so clear as he had represented
them. Relatively to his position of absolute assurance, you might
think the replies on the whole perfectly successful. But if you
had expected that they would remove all difficulty, and satisfy
every doubt, you would find yourselves disappointed, as in fact
you would have looked for more than, according to the present
state of our knowledge, any amount of learning and ability can
achieve. But, should this be so, what follows ? There will be
nothing in such a discovery, by which any one need be saddened
or perplexed ; but it may suggest some reflections which it will
be well for every one to lay to heart.
There are many things in which our highest wisdom is to
resign ourselves to the consciousness of our ignorance, Limitation
■ . 9 ofourknow-
and to the certainty that, on this side the grave, we shall leds^-
never know more of them than we do. This is the case with many
subjects of abstract speculation ; and perhaps even more so with
the history of the remote past, where our knowledge entirely
depends on evidence which, however scanty and imperfect, admits
of no enlargement or further corroboration. So it is with regard
to the two ancient nations which, next to the chosen people of
vol. n. G
82
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
God, hare left the deepest traces of their presence in the existing
state of the world, and continue to exercise the most powerful
influence on modern society. The longest period in the annals of
each is shrouded in darkness, which is broken only at intervals by
some faint gleams of light, not sufficient to afford a distinct view
of the few objects on which they fall. And even in later ages a
like bar is frequently opposed to our curiosity. We reconcile
ourselves to this insurmountable limitation of our knowledge
because, after all, that which we possess is sufficient for the most
important purpose of our inquiries, as it enables us to understand
the character and general progress of each people, and its place in
the history of the world. If the same thing has occurred in the
early history of the chosen race, have we any reason to be surprised,
or any right to complain ? It is true the particulars of this
history are more interesting to us than those of any other, just as
the geography of the Holy Land is more interesting to a Christian
pilgrim than that of Italy or Greece. But our wishes, however
natural and reasonable, cannot prescribe or control the course of
the Divine government ; and we may be sure that whatever
knowledge God's Providence has thought fit to withhold from us,
cannot be necessary with regard to any of the higher interests of
our being. If the process by which the Pentateuch was brought
into its present state has not been revealed to us, but affords room
for manifold conjecture and endless controversy, however we may
wish it had been otherwise, our part is humbly to submit to the
Divine wilL We see that, in fact, all the information that has
been vouchsafed to us as to the earlier period of the Sacred History
is very scanty and fragmentary. A few pages, sometimes a few
lines, are the only remaining record of the lapse of centuries. In
the Pentateuch itself, as in other parts of the Old Testament, we
meet with frequent reference to works, which would probably
have shed much light on persons and events, now but dimly per-
ceptible, and presenting an ambiguous aspect ; but it was not the
Divine pleasure that they should be preserved to us. But that
which we have is not only sufficient, but more than sufficient, for
the main end, the exhibition of the Divinely appointed preparation
CHARGES.
83
for the coming of Christ. Every line of this record is precious to
us ; but there is much as to which it seems to us that our view of
the whole would have been no more affected by its absence, than
it has been by the loss of those works to which the Sacred Writers
refer for information which we can no longer find in them.
Another thought which may well be brought home to our minds
by the controversies of the dav, is that we have greater Need of as-
* tinguishing
need than ever to distinguish between things which ^{J^sen
do and things which do not concern our Christian an^tMngs
faith and hope. A great part of the events related in not, concern
, i _ . our faith
the Uld lestament has no more apparent connexion and hope,
with our religion than those of Greek or Roman history. It is
true that even the minutest and seemingly most insignificant facts
may have entered into the scheme of Divine Providence, as part
of the process through which a way was prepared for the introduc-
tion of the Gospel. But this is no more than may be said of every
thing that has happened every where upon earth from the begin-
ning of the world. The adaptation of the means to the end is one
of the secrets of the Divine counsels ; and we cannot presume to
say that the same end might not have been attained by some
other means. This therefore is not sufficient to invest the means
with any share in the sanctity of the end. The history, so far as
it is a narrative of civil and political transactions, has no essential
connexion with any religious truth, and, if it had been lost,
though we should have been left in ignorance of much that we
should have desired to know, our treasure of Christian doctrine
would have remained whole and unimpaired. The numbers,
migrations, wars, battles, conquests, and reverses of Israel, have
nothing in common with the teaching of Christ, with the way of
salvation, with the fruits of the Spirit. They belong to a totally
different order of subjects. They are not to be confounded with
the spiritual revelation contained in the Old Testament, much less
with that fulness of grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ.
Whatever knowledge we may obtain of them is, in a religious
point of view, a matter of absolute indifference to us ; and if they
were placed on a level with the saving truths of the Gospel, they
G 2
84
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
would gain nothing in intrinsic dignity, but would only degrade
that with which they are thus associated. Such an association
may indeed exist in the minds of pious and even learned men ; but
it is only by means of an artificial chain of reasoning, which does
not carry conviction to all beside. Such questions must be left to
every one's private judgment and feeling, which have the fullest
right to decide for each, but not to impose their decisions, as the
dictate of an infallible authority, on the consciences of others.
Any attempt to erect such facts into articles of faith, would be
fraught with danger of irreparable evil to the Church, as well as
with immediate hurt to numberless souls.
Concluding A single word more. That which now unhappily
remar . disquiets many will turn to your profit, if it should lead
you to take a firmer hold on the centre of your faith and hope ; to
draw closer to Christ Himself, and to seek in a more intimate and
practical communion with Him, that light and life, which He
alone can impart. If the historical and critical questions which
have lately been brought anew under discussion, were capable of a
solution which should leave no room for doubt, it would not bring
you one step the nearer, or at all help you to find your way to
Him. At the best it could yield only an intellectual satisfaction,
perhaps at the risk of diverting your attention from that which is
alone needful. But if you take your stand, and make good your
footing, on that Rock which is the sole foundation that is laid for
the Church, and therefore the only one on which any of us can
find a sure resting-place, you will enjoy more than one great
advantage in looking abroad on the field of controversy which is
spread before you. One will be the sense of a happy security,
not to be shaken by any fluctuations of public opinion, or any
strife of doubtful disputations. And in proportion to the calm-
ness of that assurance which you derive from your personal
experience, will be your attainment of the still greater blessing
of a meek, charitable, and peaceable spirit, which will guard you
from harsh judgments and inward bitterness toward those from
whom you may differ, while it leads you forward in the way of
truth. And then — though your aim is not the knowledge which
CHARGES.
85
puffetli up, but the charity which edifieth — this shall be added
unto you, that you will also see farther and more clearly than
those who are standing and striving on the lower and debatable
ground. It is not that you are to expect any supernatural illumi-
nation which will supply the place of patient study, and enable
you to solve questions which have eluded the grasp of the most
learned and sagacious inquirers. But you will gain something
which is far better ; a faculty of spiritual discernment, which will
guide you safely where others, with perhaps superior natural
advantages and ampler opportunities of knowledge, may have
gone astray. In the ripening of your inner life, and, above all,
in the assiduous discharge of your pastoral duties, you will be
constantly acquiring a deeper insight into the nature of the things
which belong to your own peace, and to that of those who are
committed to your care ; and you will thus possess an unfailing
test by which you may try the character, and measure the worth,
of whatever is proposed for your assent : and, having learned
more and more clearly to distinguish between that which rests on
the sure Word of God, and that which floats on the shifting:
current of human speculation, you will so " prove all things " as
to " hold fast that which is good."
APPENDIX.
NOTE ON PAGE 20.
Whether all but two or three readers have misunderstood the main drift
of Professor Powell's Essay, is a question which does not much concern
those, who, sharing the general opinion, expressed themselves in accord-
ance with it, unless they themselves had felt a doubt on the subject ;
and, for my own part, I can say that none has ever for an instant crossed
my mind. But it does very deeply concern the character of Professor
Powell ; and in my opinion no greater wrong could have been done to
his memory, than the attempt to vindicate him from the charge of " deny-
ing miracles." Unless he meant to do that, he would have been guilty
of an ambiguity of language, which, in one so capable of expressing him-
self clearly, could hardly be unintentional, though its motive would be
difficult to explain. What ground the Edinburgh Reviewer saw for the
doubt which he intimates, p. 475, he has not stated. Mr. Maurice
(Tracts for Priests and People, p. 13), though anxiously seeking for
points in which he could agree with the writer, could not shut his eyes
to so glaring a fact. " Mr. Baden Powell," he says, "was an English
man of science. The miracles, regarded as departures from order, con-
tradicted, in his judgment, the very idea of physical science ; he could
not reconcile them. He believed that no one could." Mr. Kennard
alone, as far as I know, has ventured positively to assert that Professor
Powell " does not deny miracles ; " but he has. fairly stated his ground
for that assertion (p. 76). He first quotes some words of Professor
Powell — " The question, then, of miracles stands quite apart from any
consideration of testimony ; the question would remain the same if we
had the evidence of our own senses to an alleged miracle, that is, to an
extraordinary or inexplicable fact. It is not the mere fact, but the cause
or explanation of it, which is the point at issue." On this Mr. Kennard
remarks: "He does not, the reader will be careful to observe, 'deny
miracles,' but, feeling the increasing difficulty which scientific and his-
torical criticism places in the way of the old unreasoning reception of
them as mere wonders, he seeks to explain and account for them consis-
tently with the requirements of science, and the demands of an enlight-
ened Christian faith."
APPENDIX.
87
What Professor Powell admitted, and what he denied, in this matter,
is perfectly clear. He fully admitted that, among " alleged miracles,"
many have been real facts ; what he denied was, that any of these facts
were real miracles. He believed that they only appeared to be such to
persons ignorant of the laws of nature. On the other hand, he never
meant to deny that many alleged miracles, if they had taken place, would
have been works of superhuman power ; what he denied as to these was,
that they were real facts. "An alleged miracle," he concludes, "can
only be regarded in one of two ways : — either (1) abstractedly, as a
physical event, and therefore to be investigated by reason and physical
evidence, and referred to physical causes, possibly to known causes, but
at all events to some higher cause or law, if at present unknown ; it then
ceases to be supernatural, yet still might be appealed to in support of
religious truth, especially as referring to the state of knowledge and
apprehensions of the parties addressed in past ages ; or (2) as connected
with religious doctrine, regarded in a sacred light, asserted on the
authority of inspiration. In this case it ceases to be capable of investi-
gation by reason, or to own its dominion ; it is accepted on religious
grounds, and can appeal only to the principle and influence of faith.''
In the Charge I have pointed out the fallacy of this alternative. Here I
have only to observe that nothing can be plainer than the negative pro-
position. Unless the " alleged miracle " may be " referred to physical
causes, known or unknown," and so " ceases to be supernatural," and
to have a right to the name of miracle, it was not a " physical event," or
real fact. According to Mr. Kennard's representation, Professor Powell
would have admitted the reality of the facts related in the Gospels, which
are commonly regarded as miraculous, and only denied that they were
supernatural. Mr. Kennard would vindicate the Professor from the
charge of excessive scepticism, by convicting him of the most extravagant
credulity ; which, without raising his character as a divine, would have
ruined his reputation, not only as a man of science, but of common sense.
It would indeed be too much to affirm that a time may not come, when
acts such as the most marvellous of those attributed to our Lord, shall
have been brought within the ordinary operations of the human will, even
acting directly, without the intervention of the bodily organs. But this
hypothesis would not in the least affect the character of our Lord's
miracles, unless it could be shown that, when they were wrought, the
human will possessed such a direct power over outward nature. Pro-
bably no supposition could be more foreign to Professor Powell's habits
of thought.
Mr. Wilson, in his Speech before the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council (p. 47), gives an extract from Professor Babbage's Ninth Bridg-
water Treatise, containing "a solution which," he says, "to a great
extent, is satisfactory to many minds." It is headed, " Argument from
88
APPENDIX.
Laus intermitting on the Nature of Miracles." "The object," as the
author states, is to show that miracles are not deviations from the laws
assigned by the Almighty for the government of matter and of mind ;
but that they are the exact fulfilment of much more extensive laws than
those we suppose to exist." The argument is ingeniously illustrated by
the analogy of the calculating engine. But there is an unfortunate
ambiguity in the statement of the object, which might well withhold
Mr. Wilson from " adopting it as an undoubted or complete solution
of all questions connected with the subject of the miraculous." For
it may mean either that all " alleged miracles " fulfil the conditions
described, or that no events which do not fulfil those conditions are
real miracles. The former would be a bold assumption, if the universe
is to be considered as a " mechanism," like the calculating engine, and
it is one not to be hastily ascribed to Professor Babbage. In the
second sense the proposition seems to leave " the subject of the mira-
culous " just where it was. For all theologians would agree in referring
miracles, no less than all other events, to the Divine Will. None
would consider them as exceptions to the universality of the Divine
foreknowledge, or as thoughts which had suddenly entered the Divine
mind. But it would not follow that they should be regarded as parts
of a system of machinery, set in motion once for all, and working by a
blind necessity.
Much as there is that is both true and valuable in Mr. Llewelyn
Davies's Essay on this subject (Tracts for Priests and People, The Signs
of the Kingdom of Heaven), I fear that there are parts of it which are
likely to leave a misleading impression on the minds of many readers.
In his anxiety to correct the error of those who, as he thinks, lay undue
stress on the element of power in our Lord's miracles, he reasons so as
to suggest a grave doubt, whether whatever benefit resulted from them
was not much more than counterbalanced by the apparent countenance
which they gave, both at the time and in all succeeding ages, to what he
calls " wonder " or " miracle worship." For, apart from the effect on the
persons on whom the miracles were wrought, which cannot be properly
taken into the account, the benefit, according to the author, consisted in
the illustration of certain spiritual truths. That they were suited to that
purpose none will deny. But those truths did not, as Mr. Davies would
probably be the first to admit, absolutely need such illustration ; and a
mode of illustration which tended to divert attention from the thing
illustrated, and to fix it on something quite foreign to our Lord's inten-
tion, might seem hardly worthy of His wisdom ; and Mr. Davies
acknowledges that such an effect was in general inevitable. He says
very truly (p. 40), "It is difficult to imagine the mind upon which the
element of power would not tell with some force." I cannot so fully
assent to the exception which he subjoins : " but we are at liberty, I
APPENDIX.
89
think, to assume that the cultivated mind might be impervious to such
an argument." It is easy for a man of science at his desk to say:
" Even if I was to witness any of the ' miracles ' related in the New
Testament, I would not believe that they were the effect of any super-
human power possessed by the person who appeared to perform them."
When I know an instance of such incredulity, I shall believe it possible.
At present I suspect that the sight would make a deeper impression on
a cultivated, than on an uncultivated mind. But Mr. Davies seems
to overlook the distinction between that part of our Lord's teaching
which would have been equally true and impressive in the mouth
of a merely human teacher, and that which related to His own super-
human character. His ethical teaching could neither need nor admit
of confirmation from miracles, as acts of power. But, as such, they
were eminently fitted to gain credence for His declarations with regard
to His own person in His relation to the Father. Indeed, for those
who did not enjoy the privilege of His intimate society, or a special
gift of the Holy Spirit, they might be absolutely indispensable, though
not in all cases sufficient. The comparison (p. 41) with missionaries,
who would, no less earnestly than the Apostles at Lystra, deprecate
the being " taken for superhuman personages," seems to me to miss
the point.
I cannot help thinking that the general tendency of the Essay is to
depreciate the importance of the question as to the reality of our Lord's
miracles. It is therefore the more satisfactory to observe, that Mr.
Davies is aware that " they are so bound up with all else that is told us
regarding Him, that the history must be torn in fragments, if we attempt
to sever the signs and wonders from the other acts and discourses of
Jesus " (p. 35), and that "an attempt to cut out from the Gospel narra-
tives the ' supernatural element,' would make such havoc in them, that
we should no longer know what to make of them, or how to trust
them" (p. 37): that "we cannot shut our eyes to the fundamental
nature of modern unbelief or doubt " (p. 30) : that he does not share
Mr. Kennard's mistake as to the purport of Professor Powell's Essay
(p. 31), and sees that "the sanguine divines who wish to make the
acquiescent philosophy (that which would dispense with ' the thought
of God as really present in nature and society') compatible with
something of the old religion, by keeping the actual course of things
in one sphere, and ' faith ' in another, will satisfy neither the cravings
of the believing soul, nor the rational instincts of the philosopher "
(P- 44).
The differences of opinion as to the proper significance of miracles,
which exist among those who admit their reality, may be very wide and
important : but they are quite insignificant in comparison with the gulf
which separates Christian faith from the views of Jefferson, or Comte,
90
APPENDIX.
or Strauss, or E. Renan. On whichever side the Church of England is
to stand in future, it is at least desirable that her position should be
clearly understood. That she should have to contend against Deism and
Pantheism, may be unavoidable ; but she has reason to complain when
attempts are made to palm either system upon her, as her genuine
doctrine.
IX.
A CHARGE
Delivered October, 1866.
STATE OF THE DIOCESE. — NATIONAL EDUCATION, THE REVISED CODE.
— DIOCESAN SYNODS. — FINAL COURT OF APPEAL. — RITUALISM.
My Reverend Brethren,
On this occasion of my ninth Visitation my thoughts are
almost necessarily carried back to the beginning of the period,
now more than a quarter of a century, during which I have been
permitted to fill this chair, and to the view which I then took of
the state of things around me, and the feelings with which I
looked forward to the future which now lies behind us. In this
retrospect I find one ground of satisfaction, on which I may dwell
without the slightest temptation to self-complacency. Though I
am sure that the estimate I then formed, and which I indicated
in my first Charge, of the difficulties which beset the Church's
work in the Diocese, was not at all exaggerated, it was certainly
far from cheering ; and the very moderate expectations which it
seemed to warrant, were hardly liable to much disappointment.
Much brighter hopes might, as the event has shown, have been
safely indulged by one of more sanguine temperament or larger
foresight. I was able, indeed, to point to many gladdening signs
of growing vigour and expansive energy in the Church at large ;
but I could not discover any clear evidence that this spirit had
penetrated into our corner of the field, or any sure ground of con-
fidence as to the degree in which it would overcome the manifold
obstacles it had to encounter there. I should be still more loth
92
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
to fall under any illusion of an opposite kind, however agreeable ;
but I do find much cause for thankfulness when I compare the
present state of the Diocese, in many important aspects, with my
recollections of the past. I need not scruple to express this feel-
ing, whether the progress which has been made be great or small,
because in the efforts by which it has been brought about, I can
claim no share but that of a sympathizing and encouraging
spectator. It is, under Providence, to the clergy and the faithful
laity, though not without large help from without, that the whole
is due.
I look in the first place to the condition of our sacred buildings,
as the most important of all outward aids to religion, and the
_ surest sig:n of the interest it excites. The records of the
Condition °
i£ii(fches Church Building Society furnish a measure of the
activity with which the work of church restoration has
been carried on among us within the last half century. Between
1818 and 1865 it has made grants to this Diocese in 183 cases.
Of this number two-thirds belong to the latter half of the period.
This list, indeed, is far from representing all that has been done
in our time. It omits many of the undertakings which have been
accomplished by private, unaided, unostentatious munificence, to
which we owe some of the goodliest of our churches, among them
seven due to the munificence of the late and the present Earl
Cawdor. And, I may add, that there are at this moment more
than thirty parishes in which new or restored churches, are in
various stages of progress, from the first step, to immediate
readiness for consecration or re-opening. I do not expect to see
all of them completed. They must more or less interfere with one
another. But this simultaneous movement in all quarters of the
Diocese is a gratifying sign of healthy life.* I may also observe,
that this increase in the number of our churches has been accom-
panied by a great improvement in their architectural character.
The contrast between the earlier and the later buildings in their
style, would in general be sufficient to mark the date to which
they belong. This indeed is a benefit which, in common with the
* See Appendix A.
CHARGES.
93
whole Church, we derive from the awakening of a better feeling,
and the diffusion of more accurate knowledge and more enlightened
taste in these matters. And much as we have reason to congra-
tulate ourselves on this happy change with regard to our new
churches, it is still more important with regard to some of
those which had fallen into decay. A new church in the style
which would have satisfied those who saw it fifty years ago,
would now offend all who try it by a higher and more correct
standard. But this evil is very slight, when compared with that
which we have to deplore, when a venerable monument is
irreparably defaced by a misnamed restoration. It must therefore
be deemed a happy coincidence, that in the case of some of the most
precious remains of ecclesiastical architecture which have been
handed down to us, the work has been reserved for our day, and for
skilful and tender hands, by which they will be not only preserved
from further decay, but renewed in their original freshness.
Among these our Cathedral unquestionably occupies the fore-
most place, as well for its historical associations, as for its
architectural beauties, still surviving all the injury it Restoration
has undergone through the violence and neglect of ages. Cathedral.
I cannot lament that the imminent and growing danger of total
ruin with which it was threatened, rendered it absolutely necessary
to devote a large sum to tbe single purpose of warding off that
disaster, without any change in the outward appearance of the
building. For it followed, almost of course, that this occasion
should not be allowed to pass by, without an effort, both to pre-
serve whatever else was ready to perish, and to restore the
mutilated features of the original design. I was aware, indeed,
in common with all who engaged in this undertaking, that the
peculiar disadvantages with which it had to contend in the raising
of the requisite funds, precluded all hope that it would be brought
to an early completion. The obscurity of its position — known by
actual inspection only to a few occasional visitors, while out of
Wales its very existence, as any thing more than a mere ruin, is
by no means generally received as an unquestionable fact — not
only debars it from the sympathy which it seldom fails to excite
94
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
in those who see it, but with some passes for an argument against
the undertaking itself. We have, therefore, cause to be thankful,
that, by an extraordinary exertion of mechanical skill and
ingenuity, which has reflected some additional lustre on the name
of Mr. Gilbert Scott, the most important and difficult part of the
work, that by which the stability of the fabric was to be secured,
has been achieved.
Tardy Still, after every allowance for unfavourable circum-
the'appeai0 stances, I must own that I have been somewhat surprised
anee. and disappointed by the tardiness of the response which
has been made to the appeal of the Dean and Chapter. I had
hoped — not I think unreasonably — that the object would have
roused a more general and lively interest throughout the Princi-
pality, as well as among lovers of art and students of archaeology
elsewhere. At a time when archaeology is so zealously cultivated
— in Wales by a special Association — it might have been fairly
expected that, even if the Cathedral had no claim on the public
but as an ancient monument, this would have sufficed to secure a
mueh larger amount of support to the undertaking. On church-
men it has the further claim of being at once the Cathedral of the
Diocese, and the only church of the large parish in which it
stands. I have therefore been grieved to hear murmurs, calling
Propr etyof i11 q^iestioii tlie ixsefulness of the undertaking ; suggest-
takingder" mg a doubt, whether it would not have been better to
questioned. ^ ^ building sink into utter ruin, and to make some
less costly provision for the spiritual wants of the congregation.
I cannot deny that there is a disproportion between the scale of
the building, and the want which it actually supplies. It is a
disproportion of superfluity, not of deficiency, and may, it is to be
hoped, hereafter become less sensible, while the room remains the
same. But is any one prepared, either in theory or in practice,
to accept the principle, of exactly adapting the provision for the
worship of God to the need of the worshippers, and to condemn all
further outlay as waste ? I will not ask whether the earliest
example of such parsimony among Christ's disciples is one which
we should wish to follow. But if the principle was consistently
CHARGES.
95
applied, how many of us must stand convicted of waste, like that
which excited the indignation of Judas? How many costly
churches have we built, when four walls, roofed over, with a few
holes to let in the light, would have served the purpose of public
worship? Even if, in ordinary cases, we had acted on such a
principle, there would have been one which would have had a
right to be treated as an exception — the Cathedral of the Diocese.
Surely this ought not to be the exception, where the cheerful
sacrifice of worldly things for God's honour is the rule. I rejoice
that it is no longer a question, whether we shall abandon or pre-
serve a sacred and precious deposit, bequeathed to us by the pious
munificence of former ages, and that I may before long be per-
mitted to see the work carried to within a few stages of its
final completion. For this happy change in its prospects we are
indebted to the arrangement into which the Dean and Chapter
have just entered with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. I must,
however, observe, that their grant, together with the fund pre-
viously raised, will not cover more than about two-thirds of the
estimated cost, and that it will still be to private liberality that we
must look for the remainder. Let me add that, even if we should
descend to lower ground than I think we are at liberty to take, I
am persuaded that the outlay is likely to yield a large return, in
the impulse which this great work may be expected to give to
the progress of church restoration throughout the Diocese.
To return for a few moments to the general subject. By far
the larger part of the funds with which the work of church
church building has been carried on in the Diocese mainly ^
• t, • • ii Tiii carried on
within my own experience, has been suppned by volun- ^°c1^lt"ri
tary contributions. In one point of view this is a cheering butions-
fact, as it shows that the movement has not been checked by the
difficulty which besets the collecting of Church Rates, and there-
fore is likely to advance, even if they should be entirely abolished.
But I am far from thinking that therefore we can be indifferent
to the state of the law on the subject, either as regards others or
ourselves. It is true that, even where the rate appears to be
hopelessly lost, active exertions on the part of the clergyman have
96
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
almost invariably succeeded in accomplishing the restoration of
his church. But in many of these cases a light rate, made in time,
would have prevented the building from falling to decay, and
have spared the congregation the inconvenience of assembling in
it, while in a condition painful to devout feeling, if not perilous to
health, or of transferring their attendance to some private room,
of scanty dimensions, rudely fitted up for the temporary purpose.
No doubt the privation often purchases a much greater benefit :
the exchange of a very unsightly building for a new one of more
becoming character. But frequently the only difference is, that
what has been done at last with great difficulty, cost, and
inconvenience, would have been done earlier, more easily, and
cheaply.
The Church Bate question has been left on its old footing.
The clergy were almost universally opposed to the measure by
state of the which an attempt was made in the last Session of
Church Rate
question. Barliament to provide a substitute for the compulsory
Bate. It appeared, I believe, to most of them, that, if they were
to be thrown entirely on the voluntary principle, they might as
well, if not much better, act upon their own judgment as to the
mode in which they availed themselves of it, without any legis-
lative regulations, which might as often fetter and weaken, as
promote its operation. The loss to the Church was clear and
certain : the gain confined to one class of society, which has no
more right to it than any other. And if there were any who had
ever imagined that the loss would be compensated by the removal
of a constant cause of strife and bitterness, these had been long
undeceived by the candid avowal of the Liberation Society, that
they set no value on the abolition, except as a step which would
give them vantage ground or leverage for further assaults on the
Established Church. The general object of the Bill was one
which most Churchmen would have agreed in regarding as highly
desirable. They were quite willing that Nonconformists should
be exempted from the Bate. It was by the Dissenters themselves
that Mr. Hubbard's Bill, brought in for that purpose, was rejected,
on the singular ground, — which throws a very instructive light on
CHARGES.
97
the character of their conscientious scruples, — that they did not
like to he ticketed, or recognized as Dissenters, though on other
occasions thejr glory in the profession of their principles, and of
their hostility to the Established Church. It almost looked as if
they did not like to part with a grievance which they had found
to be not onlv harmless, but useful. The Government Bill of last
Session met this objection, so as to satisfy the representatives of
the Dissenting body, who required nothing more than the aboli-
tion of the compulsory Rate. But as the compulsion of which
they complained was that which was exercised on themselves,
while Churchmen, as far as they themselves were concerned, did
not object to it, but desired its continuance, it would have seemed
enough if those who complained of it had been relieved from it, all
things in other respects remaining as they were.
But the Bill went much further than this. It swept away the
whole system, both with regard to Dissenters and to Abolition of
Churchmen, and only permitted voluntary contributions e Eate'
to be levied in the form of a Rate, but without any power of enforc-
ing payment. It might be open to question, whether such a
power should exist : but the right of entering into a voluntary
engagement, with the liberty of eluding it, could hardly be
considered as a very valuable boon by those for whose benefit
it was designed.
I will take this occasion to remark, that a wish has been
expressed in some quarters for the establishment of a Desire for a
Diocesan Church Building Societv. There are, no doubt, Church
Building
Dioceses in which this institution has produced very bene- society,
ficial results. My only objection to trying the experiment in ours,
is my fear that the only certain appreciable effect would be to
add to the burdens of the clergy. It can hardly be expected that
the laity would take even so lively an interest in the promotion of
church building as in the diffusion of education ; and the state of
the funds which they contribute to that object does not encourage
reliance on their aid toward one in which they would not feel
themselves so nearly concerned. Still, if it should appear that the
clergy are generally desirous of making such an effort I should be
vol. n. h
98
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
quite ready to comply with their wishes, and to second it to the
best of my ability.
The Aug- Before I pass to a different subject, I must say a word
mentation
Fund. on another point of purely Diocesan interest. The
Augmentation Fund, which I founded in 1851, has now yielded
24,000/., of which very nearly 17,000/. has been already expended,
almost entirely in the building of parsonage houses. As no part
of this sum has been granted unconditionally, and the larger part
has been met with grants of equal amount by the Ecclesiastical
Commissioners, it may be considered as representing a sum ex-
ceeding 30,000/. already applied to this object, which, when the
remainder of the 24,000/. shall have been dispensed in like manner,
will be increased to upwards of 40,000/. The number of the
livings which have hitherto shared the benefit of the Fund is
thirty-four. I still intend to apply the remainder now at my
disposal and whatever may hereafter accrue to the Fund, in the
same way. But though it will be equally beneficial to the livings
augmented, I am sorry to have to inform you that it will not be
so to the present incumbents who receive the benefaction ; for the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners have found themselves compelled, in
order to provide for the still more important object of putting an
end to the renewal of leases on payment of fines, to substitute
permanent annuities for capital sums ; and the only way in which
their grants can be made available for the purpose of building is
by loan from Queen Anne's Bounty, entailing a charge of interest
on the living. Future applicants must bear this in mind. I hope
indeed, though with no great confidence, that means may be found
to enable the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to revert to their
original practice. But I must also express an earnest wish that
they would modify their requirements as to the scale of building,
which is too often in excess, not only of the wants, but of the
means of the clergy in this Diocese, and would, if it had been
lower, have rendered my Fund somewhat less inadequate to the
object ; and there are still more than two hundred benefices desti-
tute of glebe houses.
I am sure that I shall be borne out by the experience and obser-
CHARGES.
99
vation of my reverend brethren in this and in every Archdeaconry
of the Diocese, when I say that the progress made in Progress of
education in
the work of popular education has been not less steady the Di°cese.
than that of church building and church restoration during the
same period. Many of you can witness to that which is mainly
your own work, — the fruit of heavy pecuniary sacrifices, as well
as of much labour and anxiety, — the founding of new schools, the
erection of new school-buildings, or the adaptation of the old to the
requirements of a higher standard. I may also point to the
foundation of our Training College, as having marked a great
epoch in the history of education in the Diocese, and as the
origin of an impulse which has never slackened, but has been
strengthened by the institution of our Archidiaconal Boards,
which has, I hope, ensured its permanently progressive action.
But we must not disguise from ourselves, that this progress is
apparent only in places which may be considered as centres of a
more or less considerable population. The Returns which I have
received from you continue to exhibit a sad blank with regard to
day schools in the more thinly inhabited rural districts. I find no
less than 120 parishes in which it does not appear that any pro-
vision has yet been made, through the instrumentality of the
Church, for the education of the poor. I cannot, of course, under-
take to pronounce with regard to all these cases, that more might
not have been done to cover this grievous blot. But knowing
what I do of the general character of these rural districts, on the
one hand, and, on the other hand, of the difficulties which beset
the founding and support of schools, even in more favoured neigh-
bourhoods, I may venture to say that the fact of the absence of a
day school is by no means in itself conclusive proof of culpable
remissness, indifference, or want of energy in the clergyman, and
also to express my conviction that, under the present system, and
without more effectual public aid, there is no prospect that this
state of things will ever be materially amended.
Sharing, as we have done, in the benefits derived from the dis-
tribution of the Parliamentary Grant for Education, we have also
suffered, in common with others, from the changes which have taken
h 2
100
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
place in the principles or maxims on which it has been adminis-
Effects of tered, and which, however reasonable they may have been
itevisea in themselves, have certainly been far from purely bene-
ficial in their consequences. We have no right indeed
to complain, because the dispensation of the grant is regulated by
a more rigid economy than when it was comparatively small.
The more firmly we are convinced that there is no worthier
object to which the wealth of the country can be applied than the
intellectual and moral training of the great mass of the people, the
more we must desire that no part of the funds destined to this
purpose should be wasted, and that, if there had been any super-
fluous, though it may be not absolutely useless expenditure, this
should be retrenched, and the saving reserved for the supply of
real needs. Such retrenchment was one object of the Revised
Code. But it is much to be feared that it has been carried too
near to the quick, has increased the difficulties of the promoters of
schools, and has tended to discourage all who have engaged or
were ready to engage in the work of education. Such a result,
though no doubt wholly undesigned and unforeseen, must be
deeply deplored by all who believe that the present system, in
which private undertakings are seconded by the State, and
animated by the prospect of that assistance, is on the whole best
suited to the circumstances of our mixed society ; because in the
same degree in which it impairs the efficacy and shakes the credit
of that system, it favours the views of those who wish to see that
system superseded by one more comprehensive and more nearly
adequate to the wants of the nation : though with the inevitable,
at least partial, sacrifice of much which the promoters of schools
mostly consider as of supreme importance. It cannot be denied
that the present system needs, not contraction, but expansion ;
that it does not reach all for whom it was designed ; that this
country is still, with regard to the diffusion of elementary educa-
tion, in a position of humiliating inferiority to other States, to
which it is far superior in wealth. The Revised Code has
certainly gained no step in this direction. It has not only been
attended with serious losses to the managers of schools through
CHARGES.
101
causes beyond their control, for which, therefore, they could not
justly be made answerable ; but it has driven some, and those
among the ablest teachers, from their profession into other walks
of life, and it has so reduced the average amount of reward for
their services, and rendered it so precarious and uncertain, as to
lower the value and credit of the profession, and to deter the
rising generation from entering it. We have thus the prospect
that many schools depending on the Parliamentary Grant will be
closed, and that in those which are able to maintain a struggling
existence, at the cost of hard sacrifices and painful anxiety to
their managers, the work will be continually passing into less and
less competent hands. * Thus one of the most precious fruits of
the old system — the training a great body of well-educated
teachers — will have been lost. And I cannot help thinking that
this unhappy result is due, not only to an excessive and mis-directed
parsimony, but in part to a mistake, which can never be Evil of
quite harmless, and may become a serious evil — I mean theadminis-
- . . . . tration of a
the committmg the administration oi a sj^stem to persons system to
m . . persons
who are notoriously and avowedly hostile to it, as was kostue to it-
very conspicuously the case with one at least who for five years
held a high office in the Committee of Council on Educa-
tion, f To the same cause may be still more distinctly traced
the offensive and no less absurd and unjust imputation on
school managers, with which the Revised Code was introduced.
Men who had made the greatest personal sacrifices for the pro-
motion of education, found themselves charged with selfish
motives, because they opposed a change, which in their view
threatened the very existence of their schools, and which has
been attended with effects which few who do not desire the aboli-
* See an article on the Revised Code in the Fortnightly Review, May 15, 1 866,
p. 75. The last Report of the Committee of Council on Education states (p. xiii.) :
" The introduction of the Revised Code has heen followed hy a great diminution in
the number of pupil-teachers, especially of male pupil-teachers ; the total number of
pupil-teachers in 1862 (December 31) was 15,752, against 11,221 in 1865, showing a
diminution of 28.7 per cent."
t See the evidence of Mr. Lowe before the Select Committee on Education, pp.
38, 39, and Professor Plumptre on the Conscience Clause, in the Contemporary
Review, April, 1866, p. 580.
102
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
tion of the Denominational System, can view without sorrow
and uneasiness.
The Revisea It was to be expected that the Training Colleges should
relation to feel the effects of the revised system, and that to many of
Training
Colleges. them it should have proved fatal, while as to the
remainder, it is impossible to foresee how long they may survive.
Our own has hitherto endured the crisis, but has not passed
through it. Perhaps we have more reason to be surprised that
any of them should have been allowed to subsist. I always indeed
thought that there was an enormous and almost absurd dispropor-
tion between the variety and difficulty of the branches of knowledge
cultivated in these establishments, and the extent of proficiency
required, on the one hand ; and, on the other hand, the character
of the schools and the capacity of the scholars for whose instruction
this multifarious and profound learning was supposed to be
acquired. While complaints were heard on every side of the
early age at which most of the children were taken away from
school, and which rendered it almost hopeless that they should
retain even the first rudiments of knowledge, the training of their
teachers was carried nearer and nearer to a point not far below
the average conditions of a University degree. Still, under the
previous system there were opportunities, though comparatively
rare, of imparting this knowledge to some of the elder scholars.
It was found, indeed, in many cases, that an undue share of the
master's time and attention was bestowed on the favoured few,
while the many were abandoned to the care of his young assistants,
without any effectual security for their instruction in the first
rudiments of the most necessary knowledge. That was the ground
alleged, I cannot help suspecting with some exaggeration, for the
revolution effected by the Revised Code. But now that all motive
supplied by the dispensation of the Parliamentary grant for any
instruction beyond the arts of reading and writing and a few rules
of arithmetic has been withdrawn, * it seems clear that such
* " The Revised Code has tended, at least temporarily, to discourage attention to
the higher branches of elementary instruction — geography, grammar, and history."
(Report u. s.) This is the concurrent testimony of thirteen School Inspectors. On
the authority of three others it is added: ''There are however signs of recovery;
CHARGES.
103
elaborate culture of minds to be employed in tbis very simple task,
is altogether superfluous and out of place. Tbe Training Colleges
do not really belong to tbe system of tbe Revised Code, and if it
was to be considered as tbe final pbase in tbe bistory of tbe sub-
ject, migbt almost as well cease to exist.
But it appears to me tbat sucb a state of tbings would be a very
lamentable and humiliating issue of all tbe thought „
o o its opera-
and work that have been spent on the subject. I think {Xurin^6
there ought to be, in schools for the labouring classes, classes-
a large demand for that higher training which the Normal
Colleges were intended to give, though perhaps with some modifi-
cations, calculated to increase their practical usefulness. To
the principle, indeed, on which the Revised Code was based, we
cannot but give a most bearty assent. No one can deny tbe
right and duty of tbe State to demand results, where they may be
obtained, as tbe only sure test of real and honest service, and the
indispensable condition of remuneration granted out of a public
fund. Nor can it be doubted that the elementary knowledge
required by the present regulations is equally needful and profit-
able for all, and for a very large, perhaps tbe largest part, of the
labouring class, both sufficient for their wants, and as much as,
under the narrow limitation of their school years, they are capable
of receiving. But there remain in the upper and more important
division of the labouring class, a very great number whose
existence is ignored in the Revised Code, which makes no pro-
vision for their wants, but leaves and almost forces them to seek
the education which they need to fit them for their probable future
occupations, from private adventurers, utterly destitute of all real
qualifications for the duty they undertake, and who look to it only
as a gainful speculation by which they exchange empty profes-
sions for solid if not perfectly clean lucre. The question has been
asked, " Do our National Schools provide education for all whom
they ought to train?"* and it has been proved beyond a doubt,
and those schools do best in the elementary subjects where the higher are not
neglected."
* By the Rev. Robert Gregory, in a pamphlet with this title, addressed to the
Archbishop of Canterbury.
104
BISHOP THIELWALL'S
both that they do not make such provision, and that the tendency
of the Revised Code is to prevent them from so doing. The
National Society has shown itself awake to the importance of
the question, and has announced its intention of the taking steps
with a view to the supply of this great deficiency. I can only
commend the subject to the attention of those of my reverend
brethren whose position may afford them the opportunity of prac-
tically dealing with it. On the whole, I can only consider both
systems, the present and the past, as experiments, each of which
has been but partially successful, though neither has entirely
failed. It is to be hoped that the experience which has been
gained through both, at no light cost, both to individuals and to
the public, may serve to prepare the way for a happier state of
things.
In the meanwhile, the attention of the Church has been much
occupied by another question connected with this subject, which
has been discussed with great warmth, and has caused an inter-
ruption in the relations which had for many years happily
subsisted between the National Society and the Committee of
Council on Education. It is most earnestly to be desired that
those friendly relations and that harmonious co-operation should
be restored, and I observe signs which lead me to hope that this
event is not very far distant, and that a change has already taken
place in many minds favourable to the prospect of a better under-
standing between the parties. You will readily perceive that I
The con- am speaking of the Conscience Clause, which the Com-
ciause. mittee of Council have felt it their duty in certain cases
to require to be inserted in the trust deeds of Church schools, as
the condition of aid from the Parliamentary grant. I feel it
incumbent on me to say a few words in explanation of my present
views of the subject, because they may appear not quite in accord-
ance with those which I expressed, not indeed on this precise
question, but on one connected with it, some years ago. It may
be in your recollection that I had then occasion to contend against
a proposal which had been made to supersede Church schools in
Wales by others on the model of the British and Foreign Schools.
CHARGES.
105
I opposed this innovation, as proceeding on a partial and erro-
neous view of the facts of the case, as needless for its avowed
purpose, and as tending to substitute a worse for a better kind of
school. That opinion I retain entirely unaltered, or rather
strengthened by subsecpaent inquiry. But it might seem as if in
that controversy I was taking common ground with those who
resisted the imposition of a Conscience Clause. The agreement,
however, was merely apparent and accidental. My own opportu-
nities of observation led me to believe that the clause was
unnecessary, and ought not to be imposed until its necessity was
proved. It also appeared questionable whether the Committee of
Council were not exceeding the limits of their lawful authority,
when they introduced such an innovation without the express
sanction of Parliament. This last objection has been continually
urged by the opponents of the Clause, though it is evidently quite
foreign to the merits of the Clause itself. But it seems now very
doubtful whether this is an argument which can be used without
taking an ungenerous advantage of a forbearance for which the
Church has cause to be thankful. It is now certain that the
motive which withheld the Committee of Council from applying
to Parliament for its express approval of the Conscience Clause,
was the very reverse of an apprehension lest it should not obtain
the assent of the House of Commons. It was a fear lest they
should be thought not to have gone far enough and should be
forced to take steps which would drive many of the clergy to fore-
go all benefit from the Parliamentary grant. * This, however, as I
have said, is a formal and technical rather than a substantial and
practical objection. It may not be an unfit argument for a
political debate, but it is not one which much concerns or raises a
scruple in the minds of the clergy or the managers of Church
schools. If they decline to accept a grant on the condition of a
Conscience Clause it is because they dislike the clause m Vehement
itself, on grounds which would be just as strong if
l£ tionofit.
had been imposed by the Legislature. It has indeed been so vehe-
* See the evidence of Earl Granville before the Select Committee on Education,
p. 109.
106
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
mently denounced by persons who exercise no inconsiderable
influence on public opinion in Church questions, that it is not easy
for it to gain a calm and fair hearing. It requires a certain
amount of moral courage in a clergyman, whatever may be his
private opinion, to take a step which he has been told by persons
whom he highly respects is inconsistent with his duty to the
Church, and tends to the most dangerous consequences ; above all,
when he finds this proposition affirmed by a vote of the Lower
House of Convocation.
Nature of I venture to say with the deepest conviction, that
sionsonit. never has the truth on any subject been more obscured
by passionate declamation, sophistical reasoning, high-sounding
but utterly hollow phrases, and by violent distortion of notorious
facts, than on this : all, no doubt, completely unintentional on the
part of the excellent persons who were betrayed into these errors,
who were the first dupes of their own fallacies, and are perhaps of
all men living the least capable of anything bordering on disin-
genuous artifice or wilful misrepresentation. It was the natural
offect of the panic into which they were thrown by the suggestion
of a clanger threatening interests most justly dear and sacred to
them, which prevented them from exercising a right judgment on
this question, or seeing any object connected with it in its true
light. But this deep earnestness, while it does honour to their
feelings, renders their aberrations the more deplorable and mis-
chievous. I have good hope, however, that the mist which they
have raised is beginning to break and clear away. I am glad to
see that the weakness of their " reasons," and the groundlessness of
their position, have been exposed, both in and outside of Convoca-
tion, by clergymen at least their equals in abiHty and attachment
to the Church, though lower in official station. * I feel too much
* Though the argumentative force of Archdeacon Denison's " Seventeen Reasons"
has evaporated under Mr. Oakley's analyis (" The Conscience Clause, a Reply to
Archdeacon Denison, by John Oakley, M.A.") they will always retain a certain
value, as examples of a great variety of fallacies, which once actually deceived
well-educated men. Perhaps I might have been content with referring to
Professor Plumptre's very able article on the subject in the Contemporary Review, if
readers were more in the habit of consulting books to which they are referred. But I
strongly recommend it to the perusal of every one who takes an interest in the question.
CHARGES.
107
confidence in the moderation and practical good sense of the great
body of the clergy, to believe that they will be long misled by any
authority which will not bear the test of sober judgment, and I
am sure that they will sooner or later be found on the side of truth
and justice.
The general ground of the opposition which has been made to
the Conscience Clause cannot be more strongly expressed Ground of
than when it is said to " undermine the foundation of to it.
religion." But if there is any force at all in the arguments which
have been brought against it, the expression is not too strong, for
in whatever terms they may have been couched this is what they
really amount to and imply, though the vagueness of the phrase
is better fitted to excite a blind bewildering alarm than to raise any
clear and definite issue. In fact, until it has been explained and
limited it can only act upon the feelings and the imagination, and
presents no hold for any rational opinion. But when it is trans-
lated into plainer language, it appears that the mode in which the
foundation of religion is thought to be undermined by the Con-
science Clause, consists in the interference which through it the
State is alleged to exercise in the religious teaching of Church
schools. This is an allegation which we can immediately compare
with the Clause itself, so as to ascertain in what sense it is to be
understood, and how far it is warranted by the meaning of the
Clause.
Here, however, I must remark a peculiar and very significant
feature in this controversy : that, though it relates to its oPpo-
a practical subject, those who describe the Clause as never ap-
pealed to
fraught with such dreadful consequences, have never experience,
appealed to experience, but rely entirely on their own sagacity for
discerning the effects of a contingency which it is their object to
avert. * And they do so, not because the question is beyond the
range of experience, and confined to the region of theological
speculation. There is experience to consult, and such as would, I
* Evidence of Archdeacon Denison before the Select Committee on Education,
3727 : " It is then an opinion unsupported by any actual experience ? — Yes, I can-
not Bay that I have had any actual experience of the adoption of the Clause."
108
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
believe, in most cases be considered a sufficient guide. In the
present case it has been rejected or ignored by those who condemn
the Clause, but only for a reason which does not in the least lessen
its intrinsic value, namely, that so far as it goes, it happens to run
counter to their views. The Conscience Clause is not an experi-
ment which has yet to be made : it has been already tried in a
great number of schools. First, in all those in which the prin-
ciple was voluntarily adopted by the managers of Church schools.
I have yet to learn that this has ever been attended with the
slightest perceptible ill-effect. It may however be said, that
this is immaterial, and that the relaxation of the principle — the
right and duty of the Church to inculcate every article of her
doctrine on all children who are admitted into her schools — is,
independently of consequences, the worst of evils, a virtual "under-
mining of the foundation of religion." I do not expect that the
excellent persons who hold this opinion, would ever consent to
submit it to the test of experience. It is for them one of those
transcendental verities, belonging to a higher sphere, which are
degraded and profaned when they are brought down to earth, and
tried by their application to the actual condition of things, and
the real affairs of human life. I am quite content that they
should be spared such contact with the world of reality. All that
I wish is, that the world of reality should not be subjected to
their influence, but should be regulated by the results of practical
experience.
But it has been contended, that the experience gained
View taken , t
Committee such voluntary trials of the principle of the Con-
tonal foci- science Clause, is not a satisfactory test : that the school
which has flourished while governed by the principle,
would begin to go to ruin, as soon as it became a matter of legal
right. That is the ground taken by the Committee of the
National Society in their last Report. And the way in which the
subject is there treated, seems to me highly worthy of note in
more respects than one. They state that they have always felt it
their duty to object to the Conscience Clause as a condition of
assistance from the Parliamentary grant. The fact indeed is
CHARGES.
109
unquestionable. And when we consider that this opposition,
carried on to a rupture between the National Society and the
Committee of Council, has actually — which ever party may be
responsible for it — caused a great amount of serious incon-
venience, not to say positive evil ; perplexity in the minds of
school managers, and obstruction to the work of education ; it was
certainly to be expected that the Committee, when they stated the
fact, would assign a reason sufficient to show that the course they
had pursued had indeed been prescribed to them by an inflexible
law of duty.
But the ground which they assign is one which, to those who
take the higher view of the inalienable prerogath*e weakness of
and indispensable duty of the Church, must appear ment.areu
pitiably weak, and, when put forward alone, and therefore as the
strongest, as amounting to little less than a treacherous abandon-
ment of the cause, at least to a pusillanimons suppression of the
truth. They say, " No such provision is practically required for
the protection of Nonconformists, for Nonconformist parents and
guardians scarcely ever object to the religious instruction given in
National Schools ; and when they do, the clergy and school
managers almost invariably consent to some arrangement by
which the objection is removed " (in other words they act on the
principle of the Conscience Clause). "If, however," tbe Report
proceeds, " an arrangement of this kind were made a matter of
legal right, it may be feared that the peace and harmony which
now prevail in parishes with regard to education would be broken
— that parents and guardians might frequently be influenced to
demand as a right what they seldom care to ask for as a favour."
No doubt, the Committee had very good reason for taking this
low ground, however it might dissatisfy and displease one section
of their friends, who were most strenuous in opposition to the
Clause. They were no doubt aware that the transcendental argu-
ment might do good service in its proper place ; that it was well
adapted for rhetorical effect, and when wielded by an able speaker,
might kindle a useful enthusiasm in a mixed assembly. But they
probably felt that it was one which would not bear to be produced
110
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
in a Report dealing with real facts, and could not be supposed to
have influenced the minds of a Committee, composed in a great
part of laymen, who, while warm friends of the Church, were also
clear-headed men of business. The reason assigned therefore was
6uch as they need not be ashamed to avow. But it laboured
under the disadvantage and defect of being drawn, not from
experience, but from conjecture : and experience, as far as it has
gone, has proved the conjecture to be mistaken. The Clause has
been accepted without the consequences which it was feared would
ensue, when that which was conceded as an indulgence should
become a matter of legal right. I have been assured by a clergy-
man who has had practical experience of the working of the
The Clause Clause in large schools in the neighbourhood of London, *
Pacti2ino tna^ there are "no practical difficulties whatever in
ifficuities. carryjng it out," And one well authenticated case in
which the Clause has not only been accepted, but acted upon, and
the right which it gives has been actually claimed on behalf of
some of the children, seems decisive. But even without such
testimony, I own that I should think meanly of the administrative
ability of a clergyman who, having the will, was unequal to the
task of overcoming such a difficulty. For it must be remembered
that the question can only arise in parishes where Dissenters are
in a minority, and commonly a small one. But I readily admit
that the more or less of difficulty that may be found in adjusting
the work of a Church school to the operation of the Conscience
Clause, is quite a secondary consideration, and that what has the
foremost claim on our attention are the principles which are said
to be at stake in this dispute.
Principles There are two which lie at the root of the Conscience
at stake in
the dispute. Clause. One is, that every child in a parish has an
equal right to a share in the benefits of education, for which a
provision is made out of public money. The other is, that every
parent — not labouring under legal disability — has a right to
regulate the religious education of his children according to his
own views. I am not aware that either of these propositions has
♦ The Rev. T. W. Fowle. See Mr. Oakley's p;imphlet, p. 33.
CHARGES.
Ill
been disputed, as a general principle, even by the most thorough-
going opponents of the Conscience Clause ; but it has been denied
that they can be properly brought to bear upon it. It is contended
that there are other principles, irreconcilable with the Clause,
which have a prior claim to rule the decision of the question, and
so prevent the first from ever coming into play. The right of the
child, we are told, cannot justly be allowed to override one
previously acquired by the Church ; especially as it is always in
the power of the State to make a separate provision for the
Dissenting minority, however small. Even if there be only half
a dozen, a school may be built, and a master paid for their
instruction. The opponents of the Clause are liberal of the
public money, and would not grudge an expense which it is to
defray. But as outside of their circle it would be universally
regarded as a scandalous waste, it is morally and practically
impossible. This therefore is not a real alternative. The choice
lies between the exclusion of some children from all the benefits
of the school, and their admission, on terms which are said to be
a violation of compact between Church and State ; to interfere with
the religious instruction of Church schools, to introduce a system of
secular education, and thus to undermine the foundation of religion.
How far the Clause is open to these charges, is the point on
which, in the eyes of clergymen, and of all faithful Churchmen,
the question must ultimately turn, and on which it must depend
whether they can justly or safely accept the Clause.
It is to me satisfactory to find that little more is needed for the
refutation of these statements, than to translate them into more
exact terms, and to supply that which is wanted to make them
fully intelligible. As soon as the light of truth and common
sense is turned upon them, they seem to melt into air. The
question as to breach of compact, is, as I observed, Breachof
irrelevant to the merits of the clause. But yet the contract-
complaint suggests the idea of a wrong done to the clergj^man,
whose application for aid is refused, because he will not admit
children of Dissenters into his school without teaching them every
doctrine of the Church. But it has not, I think, ever been
112
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
asserted, that there was ever any compact which hound the Com-
mittee of Council to forego the exercise of their own discretion in
giving or withholding their aid. It may he a question whether
they have exercised it rightly or not, hut this must depend, not
on the supposed compact, but on the circumstances of the case.
We may imagine a correspondence running in some such form as
this. The clergyman writes : "I ask for a grant toward the
education of the poor of my parish. It contains a few Dissenters,
Baptists, and others, who probably will not send their children to
school, because my conscience does not permit me to receive any
children whom I am not to instruct in all the doctrines of the
Church." The answer might be, " We are sorry that such
should be the dictate of your conscience ; but, as stewards of the
public purse, we have a conscience too. And we should think it
a misapplication of the fund committed to our disposal, if we were
to build either two schools for so small a population, or one school
only, from which a part of the population was to be excluded.
We offer no violence to your conscientious scruples ; we trust that
you will respect ours. If you are resolved to admit Dissenting
children on no other terms, we must reserve our grant until you
shall have brought over all your parishioners to your own way of
thinking." I must own that I do not see how this can be
properly described as a compulsory imposition of the Conscience
Clause ; language which suggests an idea of violence which has
not and could not be used. It would be quite as correct to say,
that the clergyman compelled the Committee of Council to with-
hold the grant, as that, in the opposite event, they compelled him
to accept it on their conditions. But all that is important is,
that it should be distinctly understood in what sense the terms are
used, and that, as between the clergyman and the Committee of
Council, there is no breach of compact whatever. It is true that
many suffer from the disagreement. The children of the parish
may lose the benefit of education. But it cannot be fairly assumed
that the fault lies on one side more than on the other. The
principle on which the grant was refused, may have been quite
as sincerely held, as that on which it was declined. In every
CHARGES.
113
point of view it is entitled to equal respect. Which of the two
is the most just and reasonable, is a question on which every one
must be left to form his own opinion.
So again, if we inquire in what sense it is asserted that the
Clause interferes with the religions instruction of Church
Interference
schools, it turns out that it is a sense so remote from with reli-
gious m-
that which the expression naturally suggests, and which church n m
it has probably conveyed to most minds, that any argu- schools-
ment founded on its apparent meaning must be utterly delusive.
It is not denied, that a clergyman who has accepted the Clause, not
only remains at perfect liberty, but is as much as ever required
to instruct all the children of his own communion in all the
doctrines of his Church. So far the Clause does not in the
slightest degree interfere with this branch of his pastoral office.
But there is a sense in which it certainly may be said to interfere
with his teaching. It interferes to prevent him from forcing that
teaching on children whose parents wish that they should not
receive it. This may be right or wrong ; but certainly it is
something of a very different kind ; something to which the term
interference is not usually applied. We do not commonly speak of
interference as an intermeddling, when any one is prevented from
doing a wrong to his neighbour. The clergy are used to such
interference in other parts of their office, and never complain of
it. It is both their right and their duty to instruct their
parishioners in the doctrines of the Church. But in the exercise
of this right, and the discharge of this duty, they are subject to a
Conscience Clause, which does not even depend on their accept-
ance of it, but is enforced by the law. They may teach all who
are willing to learn from them ; but they are not allowed to force
themselves into the pulpit of the Dissenting minister, for the
purpose of instructing his congregation, nor to drag that congre-
gation into the parish church. They submit most cheerfully
to this interference. I should be surprised if there was one
who desired more liberty in this respect, or did not abhor the
thought of the dragonades of Louis XIV. Where then lies the
hardship of a like interference — if it is to be so called — uhen
VOL. II. I
114
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
it limits tlieir right of teaching the children of their schools,
who, in case of danger, have still greater need of protection ?
Some distinction must be drawn, to show that what is so
imperatively demanded by justice in the one case, becomes a
wrong in the other. The distinction which has been drawn for
this purpose rests on the assertion, that, although the religious
instruction of the school may be precisely what it would have
been, if there had been none but children of Churchmen in it, the
presence of one who is withdrawn from this instruction, as the
child of a Dissenter, vitiates and counteracts the effects of the
whole. The Church children are deprived of all the benefit they
would otherwise have gained from their religious teaching, while
the knowledge imparted to the Dissenting child, being, as it is
assumed, divorced from religion, is worse than useless.
Groundless I say, as it is assumed, because the argument rests on
assump-
tions, the wholly arbitrary and groundless assumption, that
unless the child receives religious instruction in the school, he
will receive none at all ; whereas the far more probable presump-
tion is, that the parent who withdraws his child from the religious
teaching of the school on conscientious grounds, will be the least
likely to neglect his religious education. The supreme impor-
tance of moral and religious training, as distinguished from mere
intellectual cultivation, may be fully admitted, but must be laid
aside as a truth wholly foreign to this question ; while the general
proposition, that it is better for a child to receive no instruction
of any land than to attend a school in which it learns nothing but
reading, writing, and arithmetic,* and that the moral discipline of
the school, however excellent in itself, is utterly worthless, is one
of that class which it is sufficient to state. For those who are
capable of maintaining it, it admits of no refutation ; for the rest
of mankind it needs none. No doubt most Churchmen, and
probably every clergyman, would greatly prefer a school, however
inferior in other respects, in which religious instruction according
* " As to reading, writing, and arithmetic, I think that without religion [subaudi,
such as I would teach them) they are better without it." Archdeacon Denison's
evidence hot'ore the Select Committee on Education, 3764.
CHARGES.
115
to the doctrine of the Church occupies the foremost place, to the
public schools of the United States. But that these are worse
than useless, nurseries of diabolical wickedness, armed with
intellectual power, and that it would have been better for those
who have been trained in them if they had grown up in utter
ignorance of all that they learned there, is an opinion held pro-
bably by few. I do not attempt to refute it. I only wish to
observe that it is an indispensable link in the chain of reasoning
by which the Conscience Clause is made out to be an interference
with the religious instruction of Church schools. But when we
hear that the benefit of this instruction is neutralized by the
presence of a child who has been withdrawn from it at the desire
of his parents, and so the religion of the place damaged, we
cannot help asking, If the religious principles of the Church
children are " poisoned " when they find that some of their
schoolfellows belong to the meeting-house, how are those prin-
ciples to survive the inevitable discovery that this is the case with
some of their young neighbours, though not admitted into the
school ? And as this would imply incredible ignorance and more
than childish simplicity, so, when it is intimated that they will
infer from the fact that their own teachers are indifferent to
religion,* this is really to charge them with an excess of intel-
lectual perversity, and of calumnious misconstruction, of which
childhood is happily incapable, and which is reserved for riper
years, and for minds that have undergone the baneful influence of
long habits of political or religious controversy.
After this, we shall not find it difficult to do justice to the asser-
tion, that the Conscience Clause virtually insinuates the insinuation
< of SGCllltlT
poisonous and deadly principle of secular education into the education
into the
heart of the Denominational Si/steni. We must observe Denomi-
J national
that, independently of any Conscience Clause, this evil system-
principle must be found in every Church school. In all, the
education consists of three parts : the moral discipline — which
the Clause does not in any way affect — the secular instruction,
and the religious instruction. All the children may be said to be
* See "reason " four of Archdeacon Deniaou'a seventeen.
i 2
116
BISHOP TIIIRLWALL'S
receiving secular education during one, and that the longest period
of their school work. The effect of the Conscience Clause is, that
some receive in the school secular instruction only. But the
character of a school must depend on that which it professes and
offers to give, not on the number of those who receive all that it
offers. A grammar school does not lose its character as such
because all the scholars do not learn Latin and Greek, but at the
wish of their parents are allowed to devote their time to a
different course of study. But I am aware how this view of the
case has been met by the opponents of the Conscience Clause ; and
it appears to me that a simple statement of their argument is
sufficient to establish the truth of that which they controvert. It
is argued that there ought to be no such thing as purely secular
Purely instruction in a Church school ; that all manner of
secular in-
struction, knowledge should be " interpenetrated with a definite
objective and dogmatic faith ; " and that " the thread of religion
should run through the whole, from one end to the other."* It
may appear, at first sight, as if these phrases were utterly
unmeaning, and could only have been used by persons who had
never reflected whether they are capable of any application to the
real work of a school. How, it may be asked, is a sum in the
Rule of Three to be " interpenetrated " with a definite, objective
and dogmatic faith ? That may seem hard ; but I am afraid that
it has been thought possible, and that excellent persons have
believed they had accomplished it, by selecting examples of the
rules of arithmetic out of Scripture. I leave it to others to judge
how far this is likely to cherish reverence for Holy Scripture, or
to imbue young minds with dogmatic faith. I only say this is
the nearest approach I have yet heard of toward reducing the
maxim into practice. I am not aware whether there are yet
Church schools where all the copies in the writing-books are
enunciations of dogma, and all the reading lessons extracted from
treatises on dogmatic theology. But this appears to be absolutely
necessary for the completeness of the system, as the completeness
* Archdeacon Denison's speech in Convocation on the Conscience Clause, pp. 16,
23.
CHARGES.
117
of the system is essential to the force of the argument. It must bo
presumed that the persons who insist on this argument enjoy a
privilege which falls to the lot of very few clergymen, that of
leisure, enabling them constantly to superintend the whole course
of instruction in their parish schools, so as to make sure that every
part, however nominally secular, is thoroughly "interpenetrated
with a definite, objective and dogmatic faith." It cannot be sup-
posed that they would feel themselves at liberty to commit so very
difficult and delicate an operation to the schoolmaster, who can
hardly ever be capable of conducting it. Even in their own hands,
it must always require infinite caution, and be attended with
extreme danger of a most fearful evil. The practice of improving,
as it is called, all subjects of study by the importation of improve-
religious, particularly dogmatic, reflections, apparently studies by
religious re-
quite irrelevant to their nature, seems much less likely flections.
to form habits of genuine piety than either to corrupt the
simplicity of the child's character, or to disgust him with that
which is so obtruded on his thoughts, and to lead him to suspect
the earnestness and sincerity of his teachers. And one can hardly
help indulging a hope that, if we were admitted to see the
ordinary work of the schools, which must be supposed to exhibit
the most perfect models of such religious education, we should
find that they do not materially differ in this respect from others
of humbler pretensions, and that the practice falls very far short
of the theory ; each being, in fact, applied to a distinct use ; the
one serving as an instrument of rational and wholesome instruc-
tion, the other as a weapon for battling against the Conscience
Clause.
There is another aspect of the subject, which I cannot pass by in
silence, because it is perhaps the most important of all, ^ admis.
though I advert to it with some hesitation and reluctance, children to
Unhappily there can be no doubt that a clergyman may schools who
, . are not to be
be convinced that it is his duty to close the doors of instructed
» in her doe-
his parish school against every child whom he is toines-
not at liberty to instruct in all the doctrines of the Church. He
may firmly believe that, apart from this instruction, every thing
118
BISHOP THIRLWALl/s
else that is taught in the school is not only worthless, hut posi-
tively pernicious, " not a blessing, but a curse," * and therefore
that kindness toward the child — if there were no other motive —
demands that it should be guarded from this evil. To others,
who quite as fully admit the supreme importance of religious
education, it may appear that this is straining the principle to a
length which shocks the common sense of mankind. That, how-
ever, is no reason whatever for questioning the perfect sincerity
of those by whom the opinion is professed. But it is not credible
that any clergyman should not be aware that this is not the view
commonly taken of the subject by fathers of families in the
labouring classes. He cannot help knowing that, probably with-
out exception, they regard the secular instruction — whether
accompanied with religious teaching or not — as a great benefit to
their children, one on which their prospects in life mainly
depend, one therefore for which an intelligent and affectionate
parent is willing to make great sacrifices. A Dissenter who knows
that he can obtain these advantages at the parish school, together
with a superintendence which may be urgently needed for the
child's safety, though clogged with the condition of its being
brought up with the view of making it a proselyte to the Church,
and severed from the religious connection in which he wishes it to
remain, will be strongly tempted to purchase an advantage which
he believes to be great, at a risk which he may hope will prove to
be small. He may know that the religious impressions which are
commonly left on the mind of the child by the school teaching —
especially that which relates to abstruse theological dogmas — are
seldom very deep, and that unless they are renewed after it has left
school, they will vanish of themselves, and will be easily counter-
acted by parental authority. He may therefore consent to expose
his child to the danger, though it will be with reluctance, in pro-
portion to the sincerity of his own convictions. Few, I think,
will be disposed to condemn him very severely, if he yields to such
a temptation. But in the eyes of a clergyman, who attaches
supreme value to a "definite, objective, and dogmatic faith," he
* Archdeacon Denison, u. a.
CIIAKGES.
119
must appear to be guilty of a breach of a most sacred duty ; to bo
bartering his child's eternal welfare for temporal benefits ; to be
acting a double part, allowing his child to be taught that which
he intends it to unlearn, and to profess that which he hopes it
will never believe. Can it be right for a clergyman holding such
views, to take advantage of the poor man's necessity and weakness,
for the sake of making a proselyte of the child ? Is he not really
bribing the father to do wrong, and holding out a strong tempta-
tion to duplicity and hypocrisy, when he admits the child into his
school on such terms ? And when he enforces them by instruc-
tion which is intended to alienate the child from the father in
their religious belief, is he not oppressing the poor and needy ?
I can understand, though I cannot sympathise with it, the rigidity
of conscience which closes the school against Dissenters : but I
cannot reconcile it with the laxity of conscience which admits
them on such terms.
I must own that I have been sorry to observe the frequent re-
ference which has been made, in the discussion of this
Missionary
question, to what is called, " the missionary office of office of the
the Church in educating the children of the sects."* ftSSk
I do not much like to see the word missionary used with ohildren-
reference to the " sects." I do not think it will tend to produce
a happier state of feeling between the Church and the Dissenters,
if they find that we speak of them as if they were heathen. It
has indeed always been the policy of the Church of Rome to deny
the right of all Protestants, Anglicans among the rest, to the
name of Christians, t But this is one of the points in which I do
not desire to see a nearer approximation t6 the Romish spirit or
practice. But if the Church is to discharge her " missionary
office in educating the children of the sects," this can only be
* Archdeacon Denison, u. s.
f "The Catholics," writes the Spanish ambassador, "your Highness is aware, are
also against her marriage with the Duke of Norfolk, uot being assured that he is a
Christian. The Earl of Arundel and Lord Lumley undertake however that the
Duke will submit to the Holy See." (Froude, Elizabeth, iv. p. 105.) Most
persons who know something of Roman Catholic countries, would probably testify,
from their own experience, that this is still the language which expresses at least
the popular view of the subject.
120
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
done by placing them under the instruction of missionaries, who
will bring them over to the belief, that the religion of their
parents — whether better than heathenism or not — is a false
religion. * To do this against the will of the parents — and as
long as they remain Dissenters it must be against their will,
though they may have been induced by worldly motives to suffer
the experiment to be made — appears to me a shameful abuse of an
opportunity, which it was wrong to give, but far more culpable
to take.
comparison We have been seasonably reminded t of an occurrence
andThe 1 with which Europe was ringing a few vears ago — the
Mortara . r 00 . .
case. foui deed by which, under colour of a sacrilegious abuse
of the Sacrament of Baptism, a Jewish child was torn from its
parents, to be brought up in the tenets of the Church of Rome.
This outrage was sanctioned by the highest authorities of that
Church. Much as it shocks our moral sense, we have no reason to
doubt, that all who were parties to it acted according to the
dictates of their conscience, and from motives of kindness toward
the child. As much may be said for those who entice Dissenters
into their schools, by opening the door to them, and then exercise
the missionary office of the Church upon them. + There is indeed
a difference between the two cases, but I am not sure that it is in
favour of the Anglican mode of proceeding. The Mortara case
was one of sheer brute violence. There was no attempt to corrupt
or tamper with the conscience of the parents. They protested
against the abduction with all the energy of grief. It would
have been far worse for them, if their consent had been bought :
and the transaction, on the part of the purchaser, would have
been not less unjust, but more dishonourable. We are indignant,
but not surprised, when we hear of such acts in the Church of
Rome. We are too familiar with numberless examples in which
* "No religion is true, except the religion of the Church of England." Arch-
deacon Denison, evidence, 3881. It is the old maxim, which had not Leen thought
over-lax, with a special restriction : Nulla salus extra Ecclesiam — Anglicanam.
t Professor Plumptre, u. 8. p. 593.
J So Archdeacon Denison, u. s. 3823. " We may ho obliged to do things some-
times which ma)- appeal to trench upon other people's rights, hut I do not think
that there is necessarily unkindncss connected with it."
CHARGES.
121
she appears to have acted on the maxim, " Let us do evil, that
good may come." But, that conduct which can only be justified
by that maxim, should be avowed by clergymen of high position
in our Church at this day, is both humiliating and alarming.
There ought to be no need of such a provision as a Conscience
Clause in this country. I at one time believed that it was not,
and never would be needed. But when I find that some of the
most honourable and high minded men among the clergy, may be
betrayed by their professional studies and associations into a
breach of morality, from which, if it had not seemed to them to be
sanctified by the end, they would have instinctively recoiled, I
am forced to the conclusion, that the protection afforded by the
Conscience Clause can not be either justly or safely withheld.
Even if it was not needed as a safeguard against a practical
wrong, it would be valuable as a protest against a false principle.
I do not myself think that the language of the Clause can be
fairly taxed with ambiguity ; though both it and some explana-
tions which have been given of it by the highest authority, have
been strangely misunderstood. If, however, it be possible to make
it less liable to unintentional misconstruction, it would no doubt
be most desirable that this should be done. But that, as long as
the circumstances of the parish remain the same, that on the per-
is, such that no second school can be founded there, the Clause,
succeeding managers should be enabled to release themselves from
the clause, on refunding the Building Grant, and renouncing the
aid of the State for the future, is a proposal to which the State
could not consent, without giving up the whole matter in dispute,
and admitting that it had no right to fetter the discretion of the
managers. This indeed has been treated as a distinct grievance.
Even, it is said, if a clergyman may accept such a restraint for
himself, he can have no right to impose it on his successors. But
those who most strenuously protest against such a right of per-
petuating the Conscience Clause, are the very persons who, a few
years ago, applauded the Committee of the National Society when
it deliberately sanctioned a clause in a trust deed, which enforced
the teaching of the Catechism to every child in a school, though
122
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
in patent contradiction to its own repeated professions, of giving
the largest liberty to the clergyman in dealing with exceptional
cases of Dissenting children. * I now pass to another subject.
Decision of Not long after our last meeting an event occurred
Committee which caused very deep and wide spread agitation in the
on two eon- ^ °
"Es8ays8imd Church, an agitation which has by no means yet sub-
sided, and of which perhaps the final consequences still
remain to be seen. I allude to the decision of the Judicial Com-
mittee of the Privy Council in the case of two of the contributors
to the volume of " Essays and Reviews." The Judgment given
in their favour was thought to sanction a new and excessive
latitude of opinion with regard to the inspiration of Holy Scrip-
ture, and the awful mystery of future retribution. To counteract
this effect some clergymen of high reputation and influence framed
Declaration a Declaration, expressing: the belief that the doctrines
of the
Clergy. which the Judgment seemed to leave open to question
were doctrines maintained by the Church of England, and for this
document they procured the signatures of a majority of the whole
body of the English clergy. The value of this Declaration was
indeed very much impaired by the ambiguity of its language, and
it appeared to me consistent with the utmost respect for all who
had signed it, to doubt whether it could serve any useful purpose,
and was not more likely to create misunderstanding and confusion.
It might be considered as a statement of the private belief of each
of the subscribers in the doctrines which were supposed to have
been unsettled. In this point of view it was indeed perfectly
harmless, but as it was then only the exercise of a right which had
never been disputed, it was not easy to see its practical drift. On
the other hand, if it was taken as affecting to decide what was the
doctrine of the Church on certain controverted points, and in
opposition to the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal, it
seemed to invest a fortuitous, self-constituted aggregate of persons
possessing no legislative or judicial authority, with functions for
which, apart from all regard to their personal qualifications, they
were manifestly utterly incompetent.
* See the evidence of the Eev. J. Q. Lonsdale before the Select Committee on
Education, 1653 and 1844.
CHARGES.
123
If the promoters of this movement had any ground for con-
gratulating themselves on its success, as indicated by the Its u^no,.
number of signatures attached to the Declaration, it could ohiect'
only be with a view to some ulterior object for which it might
prepare the way, and though no such aim was openly avowed,
subsequent proceedings appeared to show that it either was or
might have been. Such was the chief, if not the sole motive, of
the wish which was expressed in both Houses of Convocation and
elsewhere, for the renewal of Diocesan Synods. It was hoped
that these assemblies might be made available for the promulga-
tion of " some declaration of faith as to matters which were
thought then to be in danger." * They might serve other
purposes, but this was evidently that which was foremost in the
minds of those who conceived the project, and I think I shall not
be wasting your time if I make a few remarks on this subject.
There seems to be no room to doubt that the convening of such
Synods is perfectly within the power of the Bishop, The revival
, .. ni •• l'li °f Diocesan
and not subject to any 01 the restrictions which make synods,
the assembling and the action of Provincial Synods to depend
on the authority of the Crown. No Royal licence is needed
for it, any more than for our present gathering. And it has
been observed by a writer of high authority in these matters,
that " Diocesan Synods are represented among us at this day by
episcopal visitations." t There is certainly some degree of resem-
blance between the two institutions. But there is also one
material difference : that, with one or two exceptions, there is
no Diocese in which the whole body of the clergy are assembled
at the same place to meet the Bishop on his Visitation, and the
assembly which is held on that occasion in each Archdeaconry
could not easily be converted into a Diocesan Synod. The proper
character and special value of this Synod depend on the attendance
of the clergy from all parts of the Diocese. In early times, when
every part of the Diocese was commonly within an eaSV Practice in
j • i i • /> i primitive
distance from the chief town where the Bishop resided, times-
there would be no difficulty in the bringing of all the presbyters
* See Chronicle of Convocation, April, 1864, pp. 1467, 1486.
t Joyce, "England's Sacred Synods," p. 30.
124
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
together, and they would seldom form a very numerous assem-
blage. In the present state of things the difficulty or incon-
venience would in most Dioceses be considerable, and the numbers
assembled, even of the clergy alone, would be so large as to be ill
fitted to the purpose of united deliberation. Such, at least, was
the opinion of some who advocated the measure. It was therefore
proposed to guard against this inconvenience, as in our Provincial
Synods, by a system of representation, which, however, has yet
not only to be tried in practice but to be constructed in theory.
Whether any such existed in the primitive Cburches, though it
has been asserted,* seems very doubtful, and hardly capable of
proof.f In the Reformatio Legum the attendance of all the clergy
is most strictly enjoined. t "With regard to the clergy, indeed, it
would no doubt be easy enough to devise a mode by which as
many of them as chose to forego the right or the privilege of
personal attendance might be fairly represented. If there is to
be a restoration of Diocesan Synods, that right could not well be
taken away from any of the presbyters, and the exercise of it,
though it might be onerous to those who lived far away from the
place of meeting, might not be disagreeable to those who lived
near at hand. In either case the whole proceeding would be
purely voluntary. No part of it could be enforced by any legal
authority.
But another new and prominent feature in the constitution of the
Admission restored Synod, and that to which the highest value was
of laymen to
them. justly attached, was the admission of the laity to a share in
its functions. To awaken in lay Churchmen a livelier interest in
the affairs of the Church, to bring them into regular and friendly
intercourse with the clergy, to draw forth the expression of their
views on Church questions, was described as the chief permanent
advantage contemplated in the proposal ; one which would give
these assemblies an importance superior to that of the Provincial
Convocations themselves, from which the laity are excluded, as
* Kennett on Synods, p. 198. Lathbury, History of Convocation, p. 6.
t Joyce, p. 44.
X Cap. 20. "ASynodo nulli ex clericis abesse licebit, nisi ejus excusationem
rpiscopus ipse approbuverit."
CHARGES.
125
more faithfully or more surely representing the mind of the Church.
This, though as it seems an innovation on ancient usage,* is quite
in accordance with the directions of the Reformatio Legum, by which
laymen selected by the Bishop are allowed to be present at his private
conference with the clergy, though whether in any other capacity
than that of listeners does not appear, t This is no doubt the
most attractive side of the scheme. We all set the highest value
on the presence and counsel of our lay brethren on every occasion
which brings us together for the carrying on of our common
work. We are glad to learn their opinions, feelings, and wishes
on all questions concerning the welfare of our common Church.
An excellent person very lately taken from us (Mr. Henry Hoare)
earned a title to the gratitude of the Church, which has been
publicly acknowledged in Convocation, by the efforts which he
made to promote such intercourse between the clergy and laity.
The course prescribed in the Reformatio Legum would perhaps
have been sufficient for this purpose. But that which is contem-
plated in the proposed revival of the Diocesan Synod is much
more than this, and something very different. It is a system of
representation similar to that which is proposed for the clergy.
I believe that to organize such a system would in every Diocese
be found very difficult, in most quite impracticable. It has been
suggested that the election of the lay members might be entrusted
to the churchwardens. I will only say that, until the church-
wardens themselves are elected with a view to the discharge of
this function, I can hardly conceive that such a representation
would either be satisfactory to the whole body of the laity, or be
regarded as an adequate exponent of their mind and will. These,
however, are only practical difficulties which may be found
capable of some solution which I do not now perceive. The more
important question is that of the functions to be assigned Functions of
the new
to the new Synod. It seeems to be admitted that the synod,
deliberations of the old Diocesan Synods were confined — as indeed
* See Chronicle of Convocation, April 20, 1864, p. 1505.
+ The impression it leaves is decidedly for the negative. Cap. 22 : " Ibi de
quoestionibus rerum controversarum interrogabuntur singuli piesbyteri. Episcopua
vero doctiorum sententias patienter colliget."
126
BISHOP THIRLWALl/s
might have been expected — to the affairs of the Diocese. And in
the Reformatio he gum there is not only no intimation that they
were intended to be occupied by any other kind of business, but
the enumeration there given of the subjects of discussion seems
clearly to imply the same limitation. They relate indeed mainly
to the state of religion, with respect to soundness of doctrine and
legal uniformity of ritual, but to both evidently no farther than
as they came under observation within the Diocese. But the con-
sultations of the Synod now proposed are intended to take a far
wider range ; one, in fact, co-extensive with those of the Provin-
cial Synods, and, like them, embracing every kind of question
affecting the interest of the Church at large. This is obviously
implied in the peculiar advantage which is expected to arise from
the presence of the laity, whose views, transmitted to Convocation,
are to inform its mind, to guide its judgment, and, where action
has to be taken, to strengthen its hands.
I must own that I could not look forward without alarm to
such a multiplication of Synods, if one is to be held every year in
every Diocese. And, on the other hand, if only two or three
Bishops were to adopt the plan, I should not feel a perfect con-
fidence that the conclusions arrived at might not rather represent
their private opinions than the general sense of the whole body.
Reiatton of The presence of the presiding Bishop is, on every
t0 supposition, a most important element in the calculation
of consequences. His official station must always give great
weight to his opinion, which, even if not expressed, is sure to be
known. It may happen that his influence is so strengthened by
his personal qualities as to be practically irresistible, and that
every measure which he recommends is sure to be carried with
blind confidence, or with silent though reluctant acquiescence.
But the opposite case is also conceivable. It may happen that
questions arise, on which the opinion and convictions of the
Bishop are opposed to those of the majority of his clergy. I am
afraid I may speak of this from my own experience. Such
opposition is no doubt always to be lamented ; but where it
exists, it neither can nor ought to be kept secret. A frank
CHARGES.
127
avowal of opinion on both sides is most desirable for the interests
of truth. But it would not, as I think, be desirable, but, on the
contrary, a serious misfortune, if this divergency of views was to
manifest itself in the vote of a Diocesan Synod on a practical
question, so that either the opinion of the majority must overrule
that of the Bishop, or the action of the Bishop contradict tho
express wish of the majority.
I may illustrate this possibility by reference to a contro-
versy which has been recently stirred. There is a party ffiust ration
. i of a diver -
m the Church which holds that a Bishop is bound, geneyof
* views be-
morally if not legally, to confirm every child who is ^™paand
brought to him at the earliest age consistent with the ^re-
direction at the end of the Office for Baptism of Infants, and
without reference to that which is implied in the language of the
Preface to the Confirmation Office, which supposes the candidates
to have " come to years of discretion." On the other hand, there
are Bishops who — having respect to the terms of the Baptismal
Office itself, which requires instruction in the Catechism as a
previous condition, to the highly mysterious nature of the
doctrines set forth in the Catechism, more particularly in the
concluding part, to the ordinary development of our moral and
intellectual nature, and to the testimony of their own experience
and observation, — I say there are Bishops who, considering these
things, have felt themselves bound to lay down a general rule,
limiting the admission of candidates to a later period, when the
rite may be expected to leave a deeper impression, and who believe
that to rely on the grace which may no doubt attend the ministra-
tion at every age, to make up for the deficiency of ordinary
capacity, is no proof of faith, but a presumptuous and profane
abuse of the rite. By acting on this view of the subject, they
have incurred much acrimonious censure, which however has not
in the least shaken their conviction. But if the party to which I
alluded was to gain the ascendancy in a Diocesan Synod, where
the presiding Bishop took that view of his duty, and the question
was raised, it would be decided in a way which, though the
language used might be milder and more decorous, must in
123
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
substance amount to a vote of censure on him, which the dictates
of his conscience would compel him to disregard. I do not see
how such an exhibition of discordant views would be likely to
serve any useful purpose, or could be attended with any but very
injurious consequences.
Ruridccanai For all purely Diocesan purposes, the conferences
superior to which I have always desired to see established in every
Diocesan
synods. Rural Deanery, appear to me to possess a great advan-
tage over the Diocesan Synod, however constituted. They afford
the means of a freer, more intimate, and confidential intercourse
and interchange of ideas, than is possible in a large assembly of
persons who are mostly strangers to one another. The benefit
which they yield is unalloyed, and free from all danger ; and I
must take this occasion to observe, that they seem peculiarly well
adapted for the discussion of some of the questions which have
recently occupied a large share of the attention of the Church,
relating as they do to matters of practice with which the clergy
have constantly to deal, and in which they are to a very great
extent at liberty to act on their own judgment. Let me assure
my reverend brethren — though many of them, no doubt, are fully
aware of the fact — that many of these questions, though of great
practical importance, are by no means so simple as they may
appear to any one who has looked at them only from one side, or
under the influence of traditional associations. But, apart from
any such special object, it is certain that a clergyman who lives
in constant spiritual isolation from his brethren, meeting them
only on secular or merely formal occasions, but, in the things
which most deeply concern the work of his calling, stands wholly
aloof from them, shut up within the narrow round of his own
thoughts, reading, and experience, must lose what might be a
most precious aid, both to his personal edification and his minis-
terial usefulness. If he was imprisoned in this solitude, as may
happen to a missionary at a lonely station, by causes beyond his
control, he would be worthy of pity. If the seclusion is voluntary
and self-imposed, when the benefits of intellectual and spiritual
communion with his brethren are within his reach, it can hardly
CHARGES.
129
be reconciled with a right sense of duty, or a real interest in his
Master's service.
For such purposes no Diocesan Synod can supersede the Ruri-
decanal Meeting, while, for the purpose of ascertain- The church
ing the mind of the laity on Church questions, and 1 u on'
bringing it to bear both on Convocation and the Legislature,
another kind of machinery has been not only devised, but actually
framed and set in motion, which, though its organization may be
susceptible of great improvement, seems to me in its general idea
far more appropriate, as well as much more easily applicable to
the object, than a multitude of Diocesan Synods, subject to per-
petual variation in their number, and depending on contingencies
which cannot be foreseen, for their very existence, and still more
for their capacity of furnishing an adequate or faithful representa-
tion of the whole body of lay Churchmen ; I allude to the asso-
ciation founded by the late Mr. Hoare under the name of the
Church Institution. It is now six years since I drew your atten-
tion to this. subject in a Charge, expressing my sympathy with
the general aim and spirit of the association, but at the same time
stating some objections which had been made to its organization,
as laying it open to the suspicion of reflecting a particular shade
of opinion rather than the common feeling of the Church. Three
years ago the subject was brought before the Upper House of
Convocation, when the usefulness of the Church Institution was
fully recognized, and its fundamental principle unanimously
admitted, but with the same qualification as to the precise form of
its organization, which however has not, as far as I am aware,
been yet altered ; perhaps because experience has shown that the
danger apprehended from it is not very serious, and does not
practically affect the working of the Institution.
But there is a purpose for which the Diocesan Synod, in its
primitive form, as a full assembly of all the clergy of the Pmp0Be for
Diocese, with the addition of as many of the lay mem- ^san D'°"
hers of the Church as may be willing to meet them, is aSpt*d.are
eminently well fitted, and just in the same degree as it is ill fitted
for any decision which requires calm discussion and orderly
vol.. II. k
130
BISHOP TIIIRLWALL'S
deliberation. This is the purpose of proclaiming any foregone
conclusion, and of passing resolutions by acclamation, without a
dissentient voice. This function of the Diocesan Synod is recog-
nized by a highly esteemed writer on the subject, whose work
appeared when the Church was deeply agitated by the Judgment
of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Gorhani
Case, as one main ground for recommending the revival of these
Synods, with a " close adherence to the primitive model."* It
would serve " for the plain assertion of any article of the faith
which may have been notoriously impugned." And in the
Diocese in which an article of faith was supposed to have been
impugned by the decision of the Judicial Committee in the
Gorham Case, such a Diocesan Synod was assembled, and did
make " a plain assertion " of the article. This example has not
been forgotten. Soon after the publication of the Judgment in
the more recent trials for false doctrine, by which other articles of
faith were supposed to be impugned, a resolution was passed at a
meeting of Rural Deans and Archdeacons in the Diocese of Oxford,
declaring "that the meeting would rejoice to see the action of
Diocesan Synods restored in the Church of England," and " that
the circumstances of the present times peculiarly call for such a
gathering for the guardianship of the faith. "t Such language
inevitably raises the question, What is the precise object contem-
„. . plated by those who desire to see Diocesan Synods
Objects con- r J J
byTheired restored for this purpose ? We see at once that it is
ies ora ion. g^g^ng more than the personal satisfaction which
each member of the Synod might derive from the expression of an
opinion which he holds in common with a large body of his
brethren. The avowed object is far more practical and more
important. It is nothing less than " the guardianship of the
faith ; " which, if " the circumstances of the present times pecu-
liarly call for such a gathering" for that end, must be supposed
to be in danger. And the nature of the danger thus signified is
too clear to be mistaken : it is that now again, as in the Gorham
* Joyce, England's Sacred Synods, p. 36,
t Chronicle o! Convocation, April 19, 1864.
CHARGES.
131
Judgment, articles of the faith are believed by many to have been
" impugned ; " and hence " the plain assertion " of them is again
considered as the most pressing business of a Diocesan Synod.
Now let us remember how the doctrines which are alleged to be
articles of the faith have been impugned. They have been
impugned in two ways : first, by the writers who disputed or
questioned them, and who on that account were brought to trial ;
and, secondly, by the solemn Judgment of the highest Court of
Appeal, which, after the amplest discussion and the maturest
deliberation, decided that those writers had not, in the matters
alleged against them, impugned any article of the faith, and were
not liable to the penalties which they would have incurred if they
had done so.
It would have been possible, and quite as easy, to have taken
the step now proposed when the writings in which the Theirpr0
doctrines in question were assailed first appeared, ence^orfthe
Diocesan Synods might have been assembled, and have ^saysand
" plainly asserted " that the propositions which the
authors impugned were not only true, but articles of the faith.
None can say what might not have been the effect of such a pro-
ceeding. It is not impossible that the writers might have yielded
to such a weight of authority, and have retracted and abandoned
opinions which they found to be opposed to those of an over-
whelming majority of their brethren. On the other hand, as they
have the reputation, and perhaps would not disclaim the name of
rationalists, it is equally possible, and on the whole perhaps rather
more probable, that they would have pleaded at the outset to the
jurisdiction ; would have denied that the question ought or could
be decided by a show of hands ; and that even the assertions of
thirty Synods would have been as powerless as thirty legions, to
produce the slightest change in their convictions. The question
would then have remained exactly where it was before the Synods
met. And not only would their decrees have made no change
whatever in the ecclesiastical position of the writers whom they
condemned ; but it is clear that they would not have been
admitted as evidence in any Court which had to try the question.
k 2
132
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
They could add nothing to the force of any proof which might be
required to invest the controverted doctrines with the character of
articles of faith ; much less could they cause any thing which
would not otherwise have been an article of faith to become such.
Their effi- But ^ sucn woul^ have been their impotence before
oppoSfto the Judgment of the supreme tribunal had been pro-
Committee. nounced, and therefore while it was possible that it
might confirm their assertions, what efficacy can the decrees of
such Synods, whether few or many, possess, when they contradict
that Judgment ? How are they to " guard the faith " against any
danger with which it is threatened by the Judgment ? The danger
is supposed to arise from the latitude of opinion allowed to the
clergy on certain points. But as long as the law under which we
live remains unchanged, no number of voices, either of individuals or
of clerical assemblies, can contract that latitude by a hair's breadth.
All this is too evident not to be thoroughly understood by the
highly intelligent, sagacious, and well-informed persons who are
promoting the restoration of Diocesan Synods. It cannot be
supposed that they deceive themselves as to the intrinsic value or
the immediate practical effect, either of Declarations endorsed by
any number of signatures, or of Synodical resolutions proclaimed
by any number of voices. If they attach any importance to such
documents and proceedings, it must be with a view to some
ulterior object. And I think there can be little doubt what that
object is. It is, I believe, the same which has been only a little
more fully disclosed by the efforts which have been made to bring
constitution about a radical change in the constitution of the Court
of Appeal, of Appeal in ecclesiastical questions. It would probably
be generally admitted that this Court is capable of some improve-
ments, both in its composition and in the form of its proceedings.
But those who are dissatisfied with the Judgment which gave
occasion to this movement, would certainly care little about any
change which did not hold out a prospect of reversing that
Judgment, and of guarding against any like occurrence for the
future. Various plans have been proposed for this purpose ; but
it will be sufficient to notice two of them, which may be con-
CHARGES.
133
sidered as including all the rest, inasmuch as the others differ
from them rather in details than in principle. One is, to abolish
the present Court of Appeal, and to transfer its jurisdiction to
Convocation, or to some purely ecclesiastical body ; the other would
retain the present Court, but without any ecclesiastical assessors,
and would require it, whenever the case before it involved any
question of faith and doctrine, to send an issue on these matters to
the spiritual body, which should be constituted for that purpose,
and to let its Judgment be governed by the answer it receives.
There is one advantage which the first of these proposals must
be admitted to possess over the second : that it more distinctly
and completely embodies a principle which lies at the _ , . ,
c J r r Exclusion of
root of both ; the exclusion of the laity from all share doctriSd1
in the decision of questions touching the doctrines of decislons-
the Church. There are not a few estimable persons — perhaps I
might say a not inconsiderable party in the Church — who hold
that the present constitution of the highest Court of Appeal is
utterly vitiated by the admixture of the lay element : that this is
in itself, irrespectively of its practical consequences, an intolerable
grievance, a badge of an "ignominious bondage." It has been
represented as a violation of the law of Christ, and as " a breach
of compact between Church and State," by which functions, now
exercised by laymen, were reserved to the Clergy.* The divine
origin of the prerogative thus claimed for the Spiritualty, depends
on an interpretation of a few passages of Scripture, which to
many appear no more conclusive than that which is alleged in
proof of the Papal supremacy. The history of the ages and
countries in which the claim was most generally and submissively
accepted by the laity, would hardly recommend it to any one who
does not regard the Reformation as at best a lamentable error ;
but it sufficiently explains the language which continued to be
used after our separation from Rome, while the Spiritualty was
still identified with the Church, f and the tenacity with which the
* Joyce, Ecclesia Vindicata, pp. 11, 13.
t 24 Hen. VIII. 12, Preamble: "The Spiritualty, now being commonly called
the English Church."
134
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
tradition kept its hold on men's minds. And, independently of
the notion of a Divine right, and of the peculiar illumination
which may be supposed to wait upon its exercise,, there is a very
solid and palpable ground of fact, which may at first sight appear
to furnish an irresistible argument for assigning this function to
the clergy. It is one for which they may seem to be pre-emi-
nently, if not exclusively, fitted, though not by their calling itself,
yet at least by the studies and habits of their calling. When-
ever a question arises in any branch of human knowledge, those
who are usually consulted upon it arc the masters and professors of
the art or science to which it relates. When a point is in dispute in
the interpretation or application of the law, the only opinion which
is ever thought to have any weight, is that of experienced jurists.
Why should the maxim, "cuique in sua arte credendum," be less ap-
plicable to theology, or render it less fitting and necessary to submit
spiritual questions to the exclusive cognizance of learned divines ?
Difference This question is treated by many as unanswerable.
andTheo1™ Yet there is in one respect a wide difference between the
two cases, which at first sight appear most exactly
similar, and it deeply affects the validity of the practical con-
clusion. We know of no such thing as schools of law, by which
lawyers are divided into parties, holding the most widely diverg-
ing views on many of the most important principles of legal
learning, and thus led to directly opposite conclusions in all
causes in which these principles are involved. When we consult
our legal advisers, we feel perfect confidence, that they will
approach the subject without the slightest bias from preconceived
notions, and that, if they do not agree in their opinion, the dis-
agreement will be the result, not of any conflicting doctrines, to
which on one side or other they were previously pledged, but
simply to a natural, unavoidable disparity in the capacity or con-
formation of their minds. I hardly need observe how far other-
wise the case stands with regard to theology and its teachers ;
how exceedingly rare and difficult it is for any of them to keep
aloof from the schools and parties into which the Church is par-
celled, and not to be, whether consciously or unconsciously, swayed
CHARGES.
135
by their influence in his views of Church questions, and the more
in proportion to his earnestness and his sense of the sacredness of
the subject. Probably there were few clergymen whose opinion
on the Gorham Case might not have been safely predicted by any
one who knew the school to which he belonged ; and the bishops
who sat on the appeal, were certainly not an exception to this
remark. The importance and interest of the case turned upon
the fact, that the individual defendant was the representative
of a strong party, whose position in the Church would have
been shaken and imperilled, if his doctrine had been condemned.
Hence the composition of a purely ecclesiastical tribu- Difficulties
nal, to be substituted for the present Court of Appeal in theesta-m
r \ . blishmentof
causes of heresv, is a problem beset with such compli- a p"1'?1? . ,
* ' A ecclesiastical
cated difficulties, as to render it almost hopeless that tl'ibuiial-
any scheme will ever be devised for its solution, which would
give general satisfaction ; even if there were not so many who
would reject it for the very reason, that it appears to recognise
a principle — the mystical prerogative of the clergy — which
they reject as groundless and mischievous. If the Spiritualty
is to have the final and exclusive cognizance of such causes, it
becomes necessary to inquire, Who are the Spiritualty ? And
the answer to this question will be found to involve most per-
plexing difficulties both in theory and practice. By the proper
meaning of the word, the Spiritualty would include all spiritual
persons of every Holy Order. But as, according to the high
sacerdotal view, the laity is for all purposes concerning the
declaration of doctrine merged in the Spiritualty, so by some
who most zealously maintain that view, the lower orders of the
Spiritualty are for the like purposes held to be merged in the
Episcopate, as invested with the fulness of Apostolical authority.
It cannot be denied that this opinion may claim the sanction of
antiquity, and of the whole history of Councils from the earliest
to the latest times. But our own Church presents an exception
to the general rule in the constitution of its Synods, in which the
clergy of the second Order form an essential element. They,
however, are only elect representatives of the body to which they
136
15ISH0P THIRLWALL'S
belong, and by a fiction, wbicb, bowever convenient, seems to be
purely arbitrary, tbe tbird Order of tbe Ministry is for tbis pur-
pose regarded as merged in tbe second. But tbougb our two
Convocations do legally, bowever imperfectly, represent our own
brancb of tbe Cburcb, it does not appear on wbat principle eitber
tbe Irisb or any otber branches of tbe Churcb can be rigbtly
excluded from a sbare in deliberations wbich affect tbe common
faitb. At present tbere are no means of assembling even a
National Synod. A Synod of tbe wbole Englisb Communion,
wbicb bas been recently proposed, would require macbinery
wbicb it would be still more difficult to frame and to work, and
it would be still more doubtful wbetber, as long as tbe relations
of our Cburcb to the State subsist, such a Synod could answer
the purpose for which it appears to be designed.
_ . But in this matter we are forced at every turn to
Synods un- •>
disunions choose between equal and irreconcilable difficulties,
on octnne. rpj^ iarger an(j more comprehensive the Synod which
may be brought together, at whatever cost, the more adequately
will it represent, if not the Church, at least the Spiritualty. But
in proportion as its numbers adapt it to this object, and so give
the greater weight to its decisions, do they tend to unfit it for the
discussion of controverted points of doctrine, and so detract from
its authority. On the other hand, the smaller the body which
meets for deliberation, so much the better, no doubt, will it be
suited for the full ventilation of the matters in dispute ; but in the
same degree it will be liable to suspicions of partizansbip and pre-
possession, and will appear incapable of becoming the organ of
the whole Church for the declaration of its faith. Even so small
a body as the whole English Episcopate, has been thought too
unwieldy for a theological discussion, while every selection from
it has been generally condemned, as inconsistent with public confi-
dence in its impartiality. It will also have to be considered
whether, when the faith of the Church is at stake, it is possible to
dispense with absolute unanimity among those by whom it is to
be determined; or, if the vote of the majority is to prevail,
whether the minority must not be held to stand self-convicted of
CHARGES.
187
heresy, and if they refuse to recant, be excommunicated. This indeed
would raise no difficulty in a Church unconnected with the State ;
but under the present mutual relations of Church and State, such a
proceeding would be as ineffectual, as for one Bishop to excommuni-
cate another of a different school, and, as a means of checking the
growth of heresy, would be merely futile, and expose itself to derision.
These objections are equally applicable to the second of the two
proposals we are considering, that of retaining the present Proposal to
Court of Appeal, under the condition of referring all £rinaiDques-
i*i i/> • i ± 1 tions to an
questions or doctrine which come before it, to an eccle- ecciesiasti-
siastical council, which remains to be constituted. For
the issue sent by the Judicial Committee would be just as
grave, as if the cause had been originally brought under the
cognizance of the Spiritualty. Yet it seems pretty clear that of
the two this is the plan which has most voices on its side, and is
commonly thought to look most like a practicable measure. But
if I am not mistaken, there is another difficulty on which this
project also must split. Either the lay judges must be governed
by the decision of their spiritual referees, or, after receiving the
answer to their question, they will be still at liberty to exercise
their own judgment on the whole case. That the members of the
Judicial Committee would ever consent, or be permitted, to
renounce their supreme jurisdiction, and exchange their judicial
functions in this behalf for a purely ministerial agency, by which
they will have passively to accept, and simply to carry into effect,
the decisions of a Clerical Council — this is something which I
believe is no longer imagined to be possible, even by the most
ardent and sanguine advocate of what he calls the inalienable
rights of the clergy, so long as the Church remains in union with
the State on the present terms of the alliance. But if they do not
take up this subordinate position, the principle of the ecclesiastical
prerogative in matters of doctrine, which to those who maintain it
is probably more precious than any particular application of it, is
abandoned and lost. The Church will, in their language, continue
to groan in " galling fetters," and " an ignominious bondage." *
* Joyce, u. s. p. 220.
138
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
On the other hand, if the Judicial Committee retains its indepen-
dence, and is not bound to adopt the opinion of its clerical
advisers, it is quite certain that it will continue to act on the same
principles and maxims of interpretation by which it has been
hitherto guided, and will in every case test the answer it receives
by these principles, and not the principles by the answer.
The court of For my own part, I heartily rejoice that this is so. I
bEn/to consider it as a ground for the deepest thankfulness, as
thecimich. o^ most precious privileges of the Church of
England, that principles which I believe to be grounded in
justice, equity, and common sense, are still the rule of judgment
in ecclesiastical causes. I earnestly hope that she may not be
deprived of this blessing by the misguided zeal of some of her
friends, from whom, I believe, she has at present more to fear than
from the bitterest of her enemies. The present constitution of the
Court of Appeal is essentially conservative in its operation. Every
radical change, such as those we have been considering, would be
revolutionary and disruptive in its tendency, if not in its imme-
diate result. A wrong decision of the Court, as it is now con-
stituted, can only affect the positions of individuals in the Church,
but leaves the doctrine of the Church just where it was ; for it
only determines that certain writings which have been impeached
for heresy are or are not consistent with that doctrine, as laid
down in the standards of the Church. But the very object of the
proposed reconstruction or reform of the Court, is to enable an
ecclesiastical council to pronounce a Declaration of faith, which, if
it is to be of any use toward deciding the question in dispute,
must be something more than a mere repetition of the formularies
alleged to have been impugned, and will therefore be a new, more
or less authoritative, definition of doctrine; in other words, a. new
article of faith. It will be this really, though, of course, its
framers will disclaim all intention of innovation, and will assert
that the doctrine which they declare is that which the Church has
held from the beginning : just as the Pope maintains that his
dogma of the Immaculate Conception was a part of the original
Christian revelation, though its definition, as an article of faith,
CHARGES.
139
was reserved for the nineteenth century. I observe that the
definition of doctrine which might be put forth by our divines
would be more or less authoritative, and in this respect it differs
widely from that of the Papal dogma. No member of the Roman
Communion is at liberty to question either the truth or the
antiquity of the newly-defined article of faith. But an Anglican
definition could not pretend to any such authority, grounded on
the attribute of infallibility. Its authority would entirely depend
on the reputation of its authors for learning, ability, and impar-
tiality, and according to the degree in which they might be
believed to possess these qualities, might be great, little, or null.
Another subject closely connected with the foregoing, Eeformof
and which on that account claims a brief notice, is the tion.
reform of Convocation, which has been lately proposed and
advocated with much earnestness. No doubt, in one point of view,
this is a question of the gravest importance. If the Convocation
of the Province of Canterbury is, either by itself, or in conjunc-
tion with other bodies, to be invested with that judicial and legis-
lative authority in matters of doctrine which some contend for as
the inherent, inalienable, and exclusive right of the Spiritualty,
it is most important that it should be so organized as to afford
as full and fair a representation of the clergy as possible, and the
remedying of any defect in its constitution would be an object
on which no amount of thought or pains would be ill-bestowed.
But for any purposes which lie within the present range of its
powers and duties, it appears to be perfectly adequate, and not
to need any change. It is now, I believe, as much as it could be
made by any new arrangement, a trustworthy organ for giving
utterance to the views of the clergy of the province on Church
questions. There is, probably, no shade of opinion among them
which it does not reflect. And I think no one would say that,
if it were differently constituted, it would be likely to contain
a greater proportion of learned and able men, the ornaments
and strength of our Church. And I must take this vindication
occasion to own that I cannot at all concur with ceemnge.
those who, either with friendly or unfriendly motives, ppeak
140
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
of Convocation, some with bitter sarcasm, others in a milder
tone of contempt, because its proceedings are almost entirely con-
fined to discussion, and so rarely terminate in any kind of action.
I am not at all sure that this is an evil or a loss. It does not in
the least prove that the discussion is useless ; and if it is in any
way profitable, the profit is clear, and not counterbalanced by any
disadvantage. Not only have both the Debates, and many of the
Reports of Committees appointed from time to time on questions
generally interesting to Churchmen, a permanent value as expo-
nents of opinion and results of laborious inquiry, but I cannot
doubt that they exert a powerful and generally beneficial influence
on the mind of the Church. And this is a purely spiritual influence,
without the slightest intermixture of physical force or secular
authority, working solely in the way of argument and persuasion
on free judgments. It is, therefore, that which eminently befits
a spiritual body, and it seems strange to hear this very spirituality
of its operations treated as a mark of impotence, which deprives it
of all title to respect even in the eyes of spiritual persons. While,
therefore, I can easily understand that an extension of the
ecclesiastical franchise may be desired by many, simply on account
of the value they set on it, without any ulterior object, and can so
far sympathize with their wishes, I cannot regard this as an object
in which the Church has any practical interest, and am quite
content with the existing state of the representation. But so far
as the demand for a reform of Convocation proceeds upon the
supposition that, by some change in its constitution, it may be
fitted for some enlargement of its powers, and for some kind of
work, which it is not now permitted to undertake, I consider the
efforts made for this object as futile and mischievous : futile,
because tbey can only issue in disappointment ; mischievous,
because, however undesignedly on the part of those who are en-
gaged in them, they contribute to spread and to heighten an
agitation which seems to me fraught with serious and growing
danger. I feel myself bound to speak out plainly on this subject,
though I know that the warning, in proportion as it is needed, is
the more likely to be neglected.
CHARGES.
141
The various projects we have been reviewing — Diocesan
Synods, General Councils, change in the Court of ob-ectof
Appeal, Reform of Convocation — however independent p^eS0"8
f,i ,i ■ .r • • • reviewed,
one another they may appear m their origin, are
really parts of one movement, and are directed toward a common
object ; and, when we bring them together, so that they may
throw light on each other, it seems impossible to doubt what that
object is. It is evidently to recover the position in which the
Church, as identified with the Spiritualty, stood before the
Reformation, in the period to which so many of our clergy are
looking back with fond regret, as to a golden age which, if it
were permitted to man to roll back the stream of time, and to
reverse the course of nature and the order of Providence, they
would gladly restore. It matters nothing how many or how few
of those who are furthering this movement are conscious of its
tendency ; if wholly unsuspicious, they would not be the less effi-
cient instruments in the hands of those who see further, and with
a more definite purpose. But the present union between Church
and State, a union in which, happily, the Church is not identified
with the Spiritualty, opposes an insurmountable obstacle to the
attainment of this object. Few, probably, even among the leaders
of this movement, desire to see this obstacle removed by a rupture
and separation between the two parties. But there may be some who
indulge a hope that, by continued agitation, they will be able to
bring about a modification of the terms of the union according to
their wishes, so as to free the clergy from the control of the State
in ecclesiastical matters, while they retain all the advantages
which they derive from its protection and support. Buoyed up
with this hope, they may use very strong language, and urge their
followers into very rash counsels, in the belief that, even if they
fail in their attempt something may be gained, and no harm be
done. But, as I just now observed, such agitation is not Effects of
harmless because it is impotent and useless. It is not a action3
light evil that men should be taught to consider themselves as
living in " galling fetters " and an "ignominious bondage," if
tbis is not a true description of their real condition. But those
142
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
who have been so taught, if they arc conscientious and honourable
men, will not be content to sit down and weep, but will strive with
all their might to break their fetters and to regain their freedom.
And it will be impossible for them, even with the example of their
guides before them, long to forget that, after all, these fetters are
self-imposed, and this bondage a state of their own choice : that
they have only to will, and their chains will drop off, and their
prison doors fly open. And while their old friends and fellow-
sufferers are painting the misery and degradation of their house
of bondage, and urging them to efforts for deliverance which
experience proves to be utterly hopeless, there are voices enough
on the outside, appealing to their sense of duty and of honour,
bidding them to come forth, and inviting them to take refuge in
that happy country where, among other blessings, the Church is
not confounded with the people, and her freedom is well under-
stood to mean the rule of the clergy, culminating in the absolute
power of the Pope. This, however, is not the only alternative.
If old associations, or strong convictions should prevent them from
going forth in that direction, they may find room nearer at hand
for a new Church, in which they may enjoy the shelter without
the control of the State, and may both prescribe any terms of
communion they may think fit, and enforce the observance of
them by any course of proceeding which may seem best suited to
the purpose of suppressing all variations of private opinion as to
the sense in which they are to be interpreted.
There are persons who may be attracted by the spectacle now
exhibited by one of our Colonial Churches, which has found itself
, , ona sudden, without anv effort of its own, severed from
Example of J
fndepen1?1 ^he State, and in full enjoyment of that independence
which is so much coveted by some among ourselves. I
think that its example holds out a very precious and seasonable
warning. The unexpected release from the "galling fetters," and
"ignominious bondage " of the Royal Supremacy, was unhappily
accompanied by a no less complete emancipation from the rules
and principles of English law and justice. The result showed
how dangerous it would be to entrust a purely ecclesiastical
CHARGES.
143
tribunal with the administration of justice in ecclesiastical causes :
how surely the divine would get the better of the judge : how
easily the most upright and conscientious men might be betrayed
by their zeal for truth, into the most violent and arbitrary pro-
ceedings ; exercising an usurped jurisdiction by the mockery of a
trial, in which the party accused was assumed to acknowledge
the jurisdiction* against which he protested, and was condemned
in his absence, not for contumacy, but upon charges and speeches
which had the advantage of being heard without a reply, though
it was admitted by the presiding judge that they referred to
passages which "he had often felt to be obscure," and which
exposed him to the " risk of misunderstanding, and consequently
misrepresenting the defendant's views." f This, though instruc-
tive, is melancholy enough : but it is still more saddening to
* Trial of the Bishop of Natal for erroneous teaching, p. 340. The Bishop of
Capetown founds his claim to spiritual jurisdiction on the alleged fact, of which he
thinks " there can he no douht," that " the Church, after long and careful delibera-
tion, resolved upon the appointment of Metropolitans over Colonial Churches, and
sent him out in that capacity:" the body dignified with the name of the Church
being a private company of Bishops, who recommended the appointment to the
ministers of the Crown.
t P. 343 : "A letter written two years ago, and the preface to which he refers me,
very inadequately represent the kind of reply which doubtless he would have made
to the charges which have been brought against him, and to the speeches of the pre-
senting clergy." One of these, the Dean of Capetown, had observed, that the
letter read had been put in by the Bishop of Natal, " in some degree as his defence."
And it was the whole that accompanied the protest. The real nature of the pro-
ceeding is candidly stated in the Guardian of July 4, 1866 : " If the resolution (of
the Upper House of Convocation) were to be construed as declaring that Bishop
Colenso has been regularly deposed or deprived by any tribunal or proceeding
known to Church law, it would assert more probably than could be proved — more
certainly than has been proved, either in Convocation or out of it. But that
Bishop Colenso's teaching is, as a matter of fact, dangerous and unsound to the
extent of heresy— that he is a person clearly unfit to have the spiritual oversight of
Churchmen in Natal, and that some one else ought to have that oversight ; that the
South African Church, there being apparently no regular jurisdiction anywhere
competent to try and to depose him, has, regularly or irregularly, condemned and
rejected him in such a way as it could ; and that we ought for the sake of the faith
to stand by the South African Church in this matter, though we may not approve
all the grounds of the decision — these are propositions in which the great mass of
English Churchmen would certainly agree." These last words may be too true.
But such a view of duty involves the principle that the end sanctifies the means,
and may be pleaded for every coup d'etat. Violence openly avowed is less
pernicious than when it puts on the mask of justice, and claims the sanction of
religion.
144
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
think that such proceedings should have been defended by some
among ourselves as a fair trial : though I am persuaded that this
could not have happened, if the party in whose case justice was so
outraged, had been less generally obnoxious, and I have no doubt
that if the offence with which he was charged, had been one of
a different kind — such, for instance, as the holding all Roman
doctrine — the same proceedings would have appeared to the same
persons in their true light, as an intolerable wrong. But I
believe there are many who will learn from this example of the
fruits of sacerdotal independence, among which might be numbered
the danger of a permanent schism, better to appreciate the
blessings we enjoy in the institutions under which we live, not-
withstanding the opprobrious names cast upon them by some who
rest and ruminate under their shade. One thing at least appears
to me absolutely certain : that, if there had been previously any
prospect of obtaining such a reconstruction of the Court of Appeal
as would, either formally or virtually, transfer its jurisdiction to
the clergy, that prospect would now be closed for ever.
There is indeed an unmistakable indication that the general
tendency of our time does not set in that direction, but in quite
Clerical another, in the Clerical Subscription Act of last year.
Subscrip-
tion Act. That the Report on which that measure was founded,
should have obtained the unanimous concurrence of so large a
number of persons as composed the Royal Commission, represent-
ing every party in the Church, is one of the most remarkable and
the most auspicious events of our day. It marks the crowning
result of a reaction, that of Christian wisdom and charity against
the spirit and the policy which dictated the Act of Uniformity,
passed amidst the narrow views and evil passions of the Restora-
tion. The declared object of the new Act was to relieve
Its object.
tender consciences, by the alteration of forms which
were designed to be as exclusive as possible, and which have no
doubt excluded many from the ministry of the Church, and have
perplexed and distressed many more within it. The principle of
subscription is preserved, but its terms are so modified as to allow
a much larger range to the freedom of private opinion. This
CHARGES.
145
range indeed, is not, and, consistently with the general intention
of the Act, could not bo exactly defined. The stress is laid not so
much on the subscription itself, as on the character of the formu-
laries, to which the subscription is required, and which the
subscriber is to use in his public ministrations. It was thought
that, from conscientious men, this was sufficient security ; while
with others more explicit language would be of no avail. I con-
sider this as not only a generous, but a just and wise confidence,
and one certainly not more likely to be abused than the old
jealousy to defeat its own purpose. But I think that it does tend
to increaso the difficulty of prosecutions for heresy, and to lessen
their chances of success. Whether this is a consequence to be
dreaded, or may not be the happiest settlement of the question about
the Court of Appeal, I will not now stay to inquire. But I believe
that, whether good or evil, it was not unforeseen or undesigned.*
It now only remains for me to state my views on the subject
which for the last twelve months has occupied more of the The E;tual
attention of the Church than any other, and has been que!stl0n-
discussed with an earnestness and warmth which, while they show
the deep interest it has excited in many minds, and so at least its
relative importance, should admonish all who have to deal with it,
of the great need of approaching it calmly and soberly, and as
much as possible free from prejudice and passion. And to this
end it is not enough that we should weigh arguments which may
be opposed to our own preconceived opinions, with an even mind,
unless we also try to place ourselves as far as we can in the point
of view from which they proceed, and in some measure to enter
into the feelings with which they are urged. You will have
understood me to be speaking of that which for shortness I may
call the Ritual question : and I trust that in the observations I
am about to make on it, I shall not lose sight of the rule I have
just laid down, and that whatever I shall say may tend to promote
the common interests of truth, peace, and charity. And first a
word as to the importance of the question. A relative importance,
* See tho debato in the House of Commons on Juno 9, 1863, upon Clerical
Subscription.
VOL. II. L
146
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
as I have observed, cannot be denied to a controversy by which
the minds of Churchmen have been largely and deeply stirred.
But I entirely differ from those who regard the dispute as in itself
of little moment, and unworthy of serious attention, because it
relates immediately to things so trifling as the form and colour of
garments to be worn, and ceremonies to be observed, in Divine
service. No doubt these are things indifferent in themselves,
always subject to the authority of the Church, and deriving all
their importance from the degree in which they minister to the
use of edifying. But they would not be decreed by the Church,
if they were supposed to be utterly unmeaning : and the meaning
which they are intended to convey may be of the gravest moment.
And whether they do or do not serve the end of edification, is
surely a question in which the well being, not to say the life of the
Church, is deeply concerned. At the very lowest estimate, no
man of practical sense can deem it a light matter, if a change is
made in the externals of public worship, such as to give a new
aspect to the whole. Such a transformation must needs be the
effect of some powerful cause, and the cause of some important
effect. Nothing less than the future character and destiny of the
Church of England may be involved in the issue of the movement
now in progress.
its past I must also say a word on its past history, as this has
been strangely misunderstood. It has been suggested,
in the way of apology for those who might be thought to be
advancing too far in this direction, that the recent development of
Ritualism is intended as a pious protest against recent innovations
in doctrine, which are injurious to our Lord's Divine dignity.
But this explanation, while it implies an unmerited imputation on
the orthodoxy of the great body of the clergy who have declined
to take part in this protest, also involves a very gross anachronism.
Nearly five and twenty years ago, Mr. Robertson opened his very
useful treatise, " How shall we conform to the Liturgy ? " with
these words : " Among the consequences of the late theological
movement (meaning that which had been some years before
inaugurated at Oxford, and was then in full swing) has been the
CHARGES.
147
manifestation of a feeling more energetic at least, if not stronger,
than any that had before been general, as to the obligations
of the clergy in matters of ritual observance. We hear daily of
the revival of practices, which from long disuse have come now to
be regarded as novelties." This revival continued to make its
way ; and in 1851 had gone so far that twenty-four Archbishops
and Bishops of the two Provinces concurred in an Address to the
clergy of their respective Dioceses, which began with the state-
ment : — " "We have viewed with the deepest anxiety the troubles,
suspicions, and discontents which have of late in some parishes
accompanied the introduction of ritual observances exceeding those
in common use amongst us." Whether this Address produced
any effect on those whom it was intended to restrain, I am not
able to say. There were causes enough in the troubles and discon-
tents of which it speaks, though not to stop, to retard the progress
of the movement, and keep it within bounds : and it is not at all
surprising that it should not sooner have reached the point at
which it has now arrived. Its present phase does not in the least
require or justify the conjecture of any new motives peculiar to
our day ; nor is that conjecture warranted by the professions of the
Ritualists themselves, who are too conscious of their own history to
advance such a plea, and too well satisfied with the grounds which
they have alleged for their proceedings to feel that they need it.
Among these grounds that which used to be most strongly
insisted on, was the lawfulness of the observances intro- m , .
' The lawftil-
duced. It was contended that though, in consequence Realistic
of their long disuse, they presented the appearance of observanceB-
novelty, they were really part and parcel of the law of the land
and of the Church, which had never been repealed, though, either
through the fault of men or the misfortune of evil times, it had
been neglected and disobeyed. It followed that those who
revived these confessedly obsolete observances show themselves to
be the true, loyal, and dutiful sons of the Church, and that those
of their brethren who adhere to the long prevailing usage, though
their conduct may admit of some charitable excuse, cannot be
altogether free from blame. This is a position in which the
l 2
148
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
great body of the clergy can hardly bo prepared contentedly to
acquiesce, and so the legal side of tho question interests the
character and the conscience of every parish priest in the country.
It cannot be sufficient for him to be treated with indulgence by
those who regard him as really guilty of a breach of duty. But
though I do not expect that those who have taken this high
ground will ever retract their language, I do not think it will
continue to be repeated with the same inward confidence ; as it
rmist be felt that, to say the least, the assumption on which it
rests has within the last half year suffered a somewhat rude shock
and lost much of its credit. Several of the Bishops, a majority of
Legal the English Bench, thought that the state of things
opinion on
them. rendered it desirable to obtain a legal opinion on the
lawfulness of some of the restored observances, and by their
direction a Case very carefully prepared was submitted to four
lawyers of the highest reputation, including one who was then
Attorney-General. The joint Opinion of these eminent persona
pronounced the practices in question to be unlawful.
How re- It was to have been expected that those who would
ceived by
Ritualists, have rejoiced if the answer had been in the opposite
sense, should have been displeased and dissatified with this result.
But I was not prepared to find that any one not pledged to their
views would permit himself to decry the value of the opinion, on
the ground that the Case was " of an ex-parte character," and that
the counsel consulted fell into a "trap " which had been laid for
them.* I refrain from all comment on the good taste of this
language and on the reflection it implies on the character of the
consulting Bishops, and on the learning and ability of their legal
advisers. I will only observe that the infatuation thus indirectly
but unmistakably imputed to the Bishops, is even greater than the
disingenuousness with which they are charged. For if any one
had a deep personal interest in ascertaining the real state of the
law on the subject, it must have been those who might find
themselves compelled to bring the question into Court at their
* See the speech of the Dean of Ely, iu the debate on Ritual, in the Lower House
of Convocation.
CHARGES.
149
own charge and risk. They aro supposed to have craftily con-
trived the defeat of their own object, by laying a " trap " into
which their guides, whom they had carefully blinded, innocently
but inevitably fell. In the meanwhile, however successful one who
is not a member of the legal profession, may believe himself to
have been, in convicting four lawyers of the first eminence, and
acting under the gravest responsibility, of ignorance or careless-
ness, without the possibility of knowing the steps by which
they were brought to their conclusion, it is satisfactory to reflect
that, as far as I am aware, no one has ventured to throw out a
suspicion that they were under the influence of any bias arising
from personal feelings ; as it is notorious that if any such had
existed it would have been likely to operate rather against their
conclusion than in its favour ; nor do I know that any one has yet
attempted to show that the case submitted to them either omitted
or misstated any material fact or element of a judicial decision.
It has indeed been suggested that the persons whom it would
have been proper to consult were those who are pro- Judiciovls
foundly versed in what is called the science of Liturgi- Bishops'118
ology. This would no doubt have been the right course ploceed"lff9-
if the object had been that which has been attributed to the
Bishops, to procure a sanction for foregone conclusions. But if it
was to obtain a thoroughly unprejudiced as well as enlightened
opinion, no course could have been less judicious. Some of the most
distinguished professors of the new science have made it clear that,
even if they possessed the requisite impartiality in which they are
so glaringly deficient, they would be very unsafe guides, not only
in questions of law, but even in such as are immediately connected
with their own special study, the tendency of which appears to be
to develop the imagination at the expense of the judgment.*
One advantage, not as it appears to mo inconsiderable, will
* On Dr. Littledale's notable discovery, unhappily endorsed by Archdeacon
Freeman, about the north side of the altar, see a pamphlet, " The North Side of the
Table," by Henry Richmond Droop, M.A., Barrister, and one with the same title
by the Rev. Charles John Elliott. On Archdeacon Freeman's own not less notable
discovery as to weekly celebrations, see a Letter to the Archdeacon by the Rev. R.
II. Fortcscuo. The extravagant licence of arbitral)' conjecture and assumption in
which Ritualist writers indulge when they have a point to make out, is a very evil
150
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
have been gained by the Opinion, whatever else may be its
Advantage result. Until it shall have been overruled by the Judg-
accming ....
from the ment of a competent tribunal, it may be hoped that no
opinion. Ritualist will again reproach any of his brethren with
unfaithfulness or wilfulness, because they abstain from observances
which eminent lawyers believe to be unlawful. But I am quite
aware that the opinion by no means sets the question at rest, and
though I should be surprised if it was to be judicially contra-
dicted, I am fully sensible of the possibility that the more
thorough sifting of a trial may lead to an opposite conclusion.
That the question in its legal aspect is one of very great difficulty
will not be denied by any one who is at all acquainted with the
voluminous discussion it has undergone. I will only venture
to make one observation, which seems to lie fairly within my
province, on the peculiar character of the difficulty. It is one of
a kind which we have constantly to encounter in the highest
regions of theology, when we find two truths — such as God's
sovereignty and man's free agency — both undeniable, yet appa-
rently irreconcilable with one another. In the present case we
sign, whether as indicating weakness of judgment or violence of party spirit : or,
as is most probable, both at once. With its help, St. Paul's fyikovri (2 Tim. iv. 13)
becomes a " sacrificial vestment." The lights in the upper chamber (Acts xx. 8)
which were burning while he preached, were manifestly designed to pay honour to
the Holy Eucharist. The direction ascribed to St. James, in the forged Apostolical
Constitution (viii. 12), for the dp\npivs to officiate Xafnrpav iaQijTa (itTtv&vQ, is
deemed conclusive as to the sacerdotal character of the vestment ; though the real
Apostle speaks (ii. 2) of a rich man coming into the Christian assembly i v iaQriri
Xafnrpq., apparently not for the purpose of " celebrating." Still more seriously
shocking is the abuse made of the Old Testament and of the Book of Revelation.
Cardinal Baronius was not guilty of a worse outrage ou truth and common sense,
when he pretended to discover that our Lord robed Himself for the celebration of
the Last Supper (Annales, torn. i. p. 154). Casaubon's rebuke (Exercitationes, p. 439)
is, as to the abuse of Scripture, equally applicable to the Cardinal's modern
imitators : " Quis ferat Baronii licentiam, hie quoque fingentis Dominum nostrum ad
instituendam Sacrosanctam Eucharistiam pretiosam aliam vestem induisse, et pro
actionibus vestimenta subinde mutasse ! Hoccine est divina oracula cum timore et
tremore tractare, humana figmenta sacris narrationibus ex suo semper immiscere ? "
The next remark shows that Baronius was more excusable than those who tread in
his steps : " Enimvero non poterat continere se Cardinalis Baronius, vel Cardinalities
ccrte jam turn animos gerens, aulse Romanaj splendori et regiae Pontificum pompa
assufctus, quin aliquid de moribus hodiernis Domino affingeret." — To the above cited
pamphlets may now be added an excellent article on the North Side of the Lord's
Table, in the Contemporary Review, Oct. 1866.
CHARGES.
151
have, on the one side, a Rubric still in force, which prescribes
the use of certain ornaments in the Church by the autho- Re0oneiiia-
rity of Parliament. On the other side, we have the Rubrics with
. . , Church
uniform practice of three centuries, during which these practice,
ornaments have never been in use. Both facts are unquestion-
able, the difficulty is to find an explanation by which they may
be reconciled. Such an explanation has been thought to be
furnished by subsequent acts of Royal authority which, if valid,
would qualify the Rubric, and even, if not, would sufficiently
account for the practice. Rut why the Rubric was allowed to
remain at the last revision of the Prayer Book in 1662, without
either modification or explanation, is another difficulty which has
been bequeathed to us by the Bishops of that day. I am afraid
that it admits of a but too easy solution. When at the Savoy
Conference the Ministers excepted to the Rubric on the ground
that " it seemed to bring back " the vestments forbidden by the
Second Prayer Book of Edward VI., the Bishops might either
have admitted that they desired to see these ornaments restored, or
have shown that the Rubric under the law as it then stood would
not have that effect. They did neither the one nor the other, but
simply declared that they " thought it fit that the Rubric continue
as it is," for reasons which they had already given in answer to
a more general remonstrance of the ministers on the subject of
ceremonies. But when we refer to these reasons, we find that
they relate to no other kind of vestment than the surplice.
The Bishops of the Restoration may deserve censure for some
parts of their conduct in that controversy. Not that
* m Conduct of
they were more intolerant than their adversaries, but Kshopsof
•> ' the Resto-
it was their misfortune to have gained the power, where g^^g"
the others only retained the will to persecute. But vebtmeut9-
without wishing at all to extenuate their faults, I think we have
no right, morally or historically, to put the worst construction on
their words or actions, when they may be at least equally well
explained on a milder supposition. If, when they gave that
answer to the exception of the ministers, they believed that the
Rubric did really authorize the use of the vestments which " it
152
BISHOP THIRL'WALL's
seemed to bring back," they would have been guilty of the most
odious duplicity. But if, knowing or believing that it had been
so limited as only to cover the use of the surplice, they neverthe-
less retained it unaltered, just because their opponents " desired
that it might be wholly left out," this I am afraid would be too
much in keeping with the general course and spirit of their
proceedings to be thought at all improbable. It must, however,
be observed that though on this supposition they were witnessing,
as some of them did still more plainly by their subsequent acts, to
the general understanding as to the state of the law on this head,
it would not follow with absolute certainty that they were not
under a mistake, and that the apprehension professed by the
Puritans was not better grounded than they themselves believed.
Independently of whatever weight may be due to the recent
Opinion, I think there was at least enough of obscurity and
Necessity of perplexity in the question, to restrain a cautious and
caution in i i -i i • i • i •
forming an modest man who had studied its history, even from
opinion on
the subject making up his mind upon it with absolute confidence,*
much more from acting upon his private opinion by the revival of
obsolete observances. The use of three centuries may not be
sufficient to prove the state of the law, but it can hardly be
denied that it affords a strong indication of the mind of the
Church, which it seems hardly consistent with either humility or
charity for any of her ministers openly to disregard. But
maxims of conduct which would govern ordinary cases may not
be applicable to this. TTe are bound to judge men by the view
they take of their own position and duties, however erroneous it
may appear to us. And it is clear that the clergymen who are
engaged in the Ritualistic movement do not consider themselves
* I venture to express this opinion, notwithstanding the high authority cited by
Mr. Stephens (Book of Common Prayer with Notes, vol. i. p. 378), because I find that
in th-it quotation a most material part of the history of the question was entirely
ignored ; as it is, most surprisingly, by Archdeacon Law, in his lecture on Extreme
Ritualism, where, through this singular oversight, he finds himself driven (p. 124) to
a conclusion most repugnant to his wishes. Mr. Stephens himself seems to me ti. beg
the whole question, in his answer to the observations which he quotes from Bishop
ilant, on the limitation effected in the Kubric of Elizabeth by the Advertisements and
Articles of 1571 (p. 368).
CHARGES.
153
simply as ministers of the Church of England, but as providen-
tially charged with a missionary work of restoration and Missionary
aspect of
renewal, which they conceive to be urgently needed for Ritualism,
her welfare.* The changes which have been introduced into the
forms of public worship are a part only, though the most con-
spicuous, and perhaps the most important part of that work. In
their eyes that usage of three centuries, to which they are called
upon to conform, whether legal or not, has no claim to respect, but,
on the contrary, is a corruption and an abuse. When they look back
to its origin, they can feel no sympathy with the spirit from which
it sprang. When they follow the stream of its history, they
observe signs of progressive deterioration. And when they test
it by its final results, they find on the whole failure and not
success. The present state of things appears to them such as to
warrant all lawful endeavours to try the effect of a different
system. If the tendency of that which they advocate is to lessen
the amount of difference in externals, which separates the English
Church from the greater part of Christendom, they do not regard
that as a ground of objection, but as an argument in its favour ;
and more especially with respect to our Missions to the heathen,
as an incalculable advantage, supplying a defect which would be
alone sufficient to account for their comparative barrenness.
Whatever we may think of the past, I am afraid that no one
who does not shut his eyes to facts of the most glaring preBent
notoriety, can deny that this view of the present is but Church's in-
fluence over
too well founded, and that the state of the Church with the people,
regard to the influence which she exercises on the people of this
country is far from satisfactory. This indeed would be abun-
dantly evident if it were only from the proposals and attempts
which have been so rife of late years for supplying the acknow-
ledged want. They show indeed that the Church is awake to the
consciousness of her need, and bestirring herself to provide for it ;
but also that the means of so doing have not yet been found, at
least in any degree adequate to the end. And I think this ought
* Soo Dr. Littlcdale on " Tho Missionary Aspect of Ritualism," in " The Church
.ind tho World."
154
bishop thirlwall's
to make us very cautious about rejecting any help which may bo
offered to us for this object, unless it be quite clear that it is
offered on terms which we cannot lawfully accept. I do not
mean now to speak of the difficulty of reaching vast masses of our
population on whom the Church has at present no hold at all, and
who have to be recovered from a state often much worse than
most forms of heathenism. That would only divert our attention
from the subject immediately before us. Those who never enter
our churches because they are strangers to all religion, can have
no concern in a question about modes of worship. But confining
ourselves to this point, we can hardly fail to see clear signs of a
ordinary wide-spread feeling that something is wanting in the
services not ordinary services of the Church to make them generally
sufficiently , m m ~.
attractive, attractive or impressive. Otherwise we should not hear
so many complaints of their length and tediousness. And we
cannot overlook the fact, that the outward posture and most
probably the inward frame of perhaps the great bulk of our
congregations, is not that of worshippers who are joining in
common prayer, but that of persons listening, respectfully or
otherwise, to some devotional utterances which pass between the
minister and the clerk, while waiting for the sermon, as the only
part of the service from which they expect any benefit. It is
natural that many should wish to have this time of waiting
abridged. But, on the other hand, we hear not less loud com-
plaints of the length and tediousness of sermons, and wishes that
they should be either reserved for special occasions, or kept
within a much narrower compass.
It is not enough, by way of answer, to point to the crowds
which frequent the special service of our cathedrals, as a proof
that we may well be content with the present attractiveness of
our form of worship. No doubt as often as it combines the attrac-
tions of a majestic building, a well- trained choir, and an eloquent
Remedies preacher, it will never lack the attendance of large con-
suggested. gregati0ns. But it is very rarely that any of these are
to be found, much more rarely that all are to be found together,
in our parish churches. The example, however, shows what are the
CHARGES.
155
elements which contribute to the result : and experience appears
to prove that they may be sufficiently efficacious even when
present in only a moderate degree. The character and internal
arrangements of the building, though of subordinate moment, are
by no means unimportant ; and every indication of wilful, irre-
verent neglect, in things appropriated to the most sacred uses, can
hardly fail to injure those whom it does not offend. But this at
least it is always possible to avoid. A high strain of eloquence
can never be common ; nor perhaps is it suited to most of our
congregations. But earnestness and thoughtfulness, with the
skill gained by experience in adapting the discourse to the capacity
and circumstances of the hearers, will always enable the preacher
to awaken their interest, and command their attention. And so, if
our ordinary Services are found wearisome by those who do not bring
with them a lively spirit of devotion, this cannot be fairly laid to
the charge of the Prayer Book, where its directions are disregarded,
and the services are conducted in a manner wholly at variance
with the intention of its framers, and deprived of all their proper
charm of variety and solemnity, by the practice which excludes
all musical expression, and makes the effect to depend on the
always uncertain, and often painfully defective taste and judg-
ment of the reader.
While therefore I would readily admit that which is often urged
in defence of the Ritualistic movement, that in many of our
churches there is large room for improvement in the prevailing
practice of our public worship, I cannot find in this fact any thing
to justify, or indeed to account for the recent innovations. In the
first place the resources of the Prayer Book were very Resources of
. . the Prayer
far from exhausted. Experience, as far as it went, Book-
tended to show that a closer observance of its directions, and a
fuller use of the means it places at our disposal, without the
smallest excess over that which is perfectly legitimate and un-
questionably authorized, would commonly suffice to relieve our ser-
vices from that monotony which has been the subject of complaint ;
and which, allow me to remind you, my reverend brethren, may
be felt by many of our hearers as very irksome and depressing,
158
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
while we who officiate are wholly unconscious of the effect we
produce. And it must be added that, if there are congregations
to whom even such an amount of variation from the established
usage would be unwelcome, and even offensive, that is certainly a
reason not for, but against, the introduction of other changes,
which are generally obnoxious, not only from their novelty, but
their character. And in the next place it must be observed, that
these startling changes have been made, not at a time when the
Church had to be roused from a state of apathy and torpor, but,
on the contrary, while she was exerting herself with unprecedented
activity for the removal of impediments, and the strengthening
of aids to the public devotion of her children. I have already, at
the beginning of my Charge, touched on the evidence visible in
this Diocese, and still more in many others, of the growing atten-
tion paid to the structure and comeliness of her sacred buildings :
and this care has been very largely extended to the details of her
Formation worship. If any proof of this statement were needed as
of choral
associations. t0 ourselves, it would be found in the gratifying fact,
that choral associations have been lately formed in three of our
Archdeaconries, whose example will no doubt ere long be followed
hy the fourth. We have thus ground to hope, that the voice of
melody will be more frequently heard in our churches, to inspirit
the strains of praise and thanksgiving, and that the " psalms and
hymns, and spiritual songs," which were meant to be the expres-
sion of pious feelings, will not always be made to serve merely as
additional lessons. In the meanwhile it is by no means certain
that the success, measured by increased attendance, of the new
observances, has been greater than that of services which have
been conducted strictly within the commonly recognised limits of
the Prayer Book, and with an intelligent and judicious application
of its rules. I have no statistics which would enable me to speak
with confidence on this subject. But I believe that in most
neighbourhoods the number of those who are attracted by the
revived ritual bears a small proportion to that of those who dislike
and disapprove of it, even if they are not shocked and disgusted by
it. And I strongly suspect that those who take pleasure in it, do
CHARGES.
157
so mainly not on account of its superior sensuous attractions, but
because it represents a peculiar system of opinions.
Hence it is clear that a comparison between the two forms of
worship, with respect to their effectiveness or popularity, could
lead to no trustworthy result, and, even if it did, could afford no
safe ground for any practical decision. It is absolutely necessary
to consider the movement in itself, apart from all calculations or
conjectures as to its prospects of success or failure. Much also has
been said which appears to me quite irrelevant, as to the personal
character of those who take the lead in it. They are character of
J the Eituai-
described, I have no doubt most truly, as men of ex- ^ leaders.
emplary lives, and extraordinary devotedness to their pastoral
duties.* These certainly are qualities which entitle them to
respect ; and that devotedness may not be the less meritorious
because they are avowedly engaged in a missionary and pro-
selytizing work. But they themselves would probably be the
last to question that many, if not most, Roman Catholic priests
lead holy, Belf-denying lives, and give themselves unspar-
ingly to the work of their calling, even when it is not of a
missionary kind. It seems to me more to the purpose to observe,
that they are apparently persons of great energy and no incon-
siderable ability, thoroughly in earnest, believing in themselves
and their mission, of resolute will and sanguine hopes ; and that
the strength of the party behind their backs is not to be measured
by the numbers of those who happen to belong to their congrega-
tions. The adherents probably form a much larger body. It may
not be too much to say, looking at their connections and alliances,
that they are already a power in the Church : one strong enough
at least to make it worth our while to gain as clear an idea as we
can of their principles and aims.
The fact which presents itself most obviously on tho surface
* So tho Report of the Committee of the Lower House of Convocation on Ritual.
" None are more earnest and unwearied in delivering the truth of Christ's Gospel,
none moro self-denying in ministering to the wants and distresses of tho poor, than
very many of those who have put in use these ohservances." As the Committee
throughout ignore the Romanizing character of the movement, it is not surprising
that they should not have perceived the irrelevancy of this remark.
158
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
of the whole matter, is the change which has been made in
Change in the Administration of the Lord's Supper. The Com-
istration of munion Service of the Prayer Book is set, as it were, in
the Lord's
supper. the frame of the Roman Catholic ceremonial, with all the
accompaniments of the high or chanted Mass, vestments, lights,
incense, postures and gestures of the officiating clergy. It is
interpolated with corresponding hymns, and supplemented by
private prayers, translated from the Roman Missal. To make the
resemblance more complete, several of the clearest directions of
our own Rubric are disobeyed, and the Roman observance sub-
stituted for that appointed by our Church. * To the eye, hardly
any thing appears to be wanting for an exact identity between the
two Liturgies : and it is but rarely that any difference can be
detected by the ear. I cannot help thinking that this unquestion-
able fact deserved some notice in the Report of the Committee of
the Lower House of Convocation on Ritual, where it is passed over
in silence, and could not be gathered by any one from the remarks
which are there made on the particulars of the new practice. And
it is not unworthy of note, as indicating the spirit of the move-
ment, that according to an interpretation of the Rubric referring
to the second year of Edward VI., which was for some time treated
as indisputable, every ornament and rite of the unreformed
Church, which has not been either expressly forbidden or tacitly
excluded by the established order of our Service, is still authorized
by the Statute law, and may and ought to be used. This doctrine
^ ut,- was made the foundation of a remarkable work, which
The " Direc- '
AngiS purports to direct the Anglican clergy in their liturgical
ministrations, with a view to the restoration of the old
practice, and treats the subject with a Rabbinical minuteness,
quite worthy of the end proposed, f This interpretation, indeed,
has since been discovered to be hardly tenable, though it will
probably not the less continue to be acted upon. But it marks
the precise character of the ideal which the Ritualists have set
• This is most amply shown in a pamphlet entitled " Utrum Horum," by " Pres-
byter Anglicanus," where the directions of the Prayer Book are compared with those
of the " Directorium Anglicanum."
f " Directorium Anglicanum."
CHARGES.
159
before themselves, as the object of their aspirations : the mediaeval
type of Ritual in its most florid development, and in the most
glaring possible contrast to the simplicity of our present use.
This, I say, is a fact which, in my opinion, ought not to be kept
out of sight in any statement which professes to give a clear and
fair view of the subject, especially if it is meant to be a guide to
practical conclusions. And it enables us the better to value of
i n i • i arguments
ludge of the argumentative value oi some topics which in support of
J ° ° r the move-
are often urged on behalf of the movement, and which ment-
have even been deemed worthy of a place in the Report I was just
now speaking of. We cannot but sympathize with persons who
are governed by "no other motive than a desire to do honour to
the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity, and to render the services
of the English Church more becoming in themselves and more
attractive to the people." But it is not easy to perceive how these
motives are specially connected with the practices in defence of
which they are alleged ; and I think it would startle and alarm
most Churchmen to hear that, in the judgment of either House of
Convocation, wherever these motives exist, they will of themselves,
without any other kind of impulse, naturally lead to the closest
possible assimilation of our Liturgy to the Roman Mass. In this
case the ruling motives can be only matter of conjecture ; all that
is certain is the visible result. And this rather suggests a strong
suspicion, that the motives assigned would not have taken this
direction if it had not been determined by a prepossession in
favour of distinctive Roman usages. It has also been laid down
as a principle bearing upon the present question, that the use of
peculiar vestments for the celebration of Divine Service, and
especially of its most solemn act, the Holy Communion, is a
dictate of instinctive piety. * Yet it may now be considered as
well ascertained that for several centuries the piety of the early
Christians did not lead them to make any change in their ordinary
apparel, even for the celebration of their holiest mysteries, and
that the liturgical vestments of later ages may all be traced to the
* See "A Sermon for Easter Day," by the Rev. Edward Stuart, Appendix,
p. 45.
160
bisiiop thirlwall's
original dress of common secular life.* But even if the principle
could claim that sanction of Christian antiquity which it wants,
and which seems rather to belong, in respect both of shape and
colour, to the much-despised surplice, t still, it would not either
warrant or explain the partiality shown in the adoption, not only
of the late mediaeval forms, but of the precise variations of colour
prescribed by the Roman Ritual.
These examples, however, convey a very imperfect idea of the
extent to which that partiality is carried, and of the manifold
ways in which it is displayed. The Debate on Ritual in the
Lower House of Convocation drew forth some remarkable dis-
closures, + which leave no room for doubt on this head. I confine
myself, however, to that which is apparent in the mode of con-
ducting public worship. Where we find such a close and studied
Affinity to approximation to the Roman Catholic system in externals,
Catholicism, it is certainly not uncharitablo to suspect that there may
be a corresponding affinity in matters of faith and doctrine. This
becomes still more probable when we place two facts side by side.
On the one hand, the Reformers, who desired to abolish the orna-
ments and ceremonies now restored, had no aversion to them in
themselves, were not only fully aware that in themselves they are
things indifferent, but probably would have been ready to admit
that they are graceful, picturesque, attractive to the senses and
the imagination. But they disliked them the more on that very
account, because, in their minds, they were things inseparably
associated with doctrines which they abhorred, and against which
they contended even to the death. On the other hand, those who
* Professor Hefele's Essay on this subject in the second volume of his " Beitrage
zur Kirchengeschichte, Arcbiiologie, und Liturgik " — the more valuable as the work
of a zealous as well as a very learned Roman Catholic — has been made the foundation
of a very useful paper by the Rev. Professor Cheetham, in the " Contemporary
Review," August, 1866.
f " The clergy," observes Mr. Hemans, in a paper on the Church in the Catacombs,
"Contemporary Review," October, 1S66, "till the end of this primitive period,
continued to officiate attired in the classic white vestments common to Roman citizens,
but distinguished by the long hair and beard of philosophers ; and not till the
Constantinian period did tho bishops begin to wear purple ; not till the ninth century
was that primitive white costume (which was sometimes slightly adorned in purple or
gold) laid aside by the priesthood generally,"
J In a letter or paper read by Archdeacon Wordsworth.
CHARGES.
161
are labouring for the restoration of the pre-Reforniation Ritual
though they do not neglect to avail themselves of such general
pleas as I was just now noticing, grounded on the common instincts
and cravings of human nature, when they come distinctly to
enumerate " the ends to which Ritual and Ceremonial „
Symbolism
minister," specify as one end, that " they are the ^f^.
expressions of doctrine, and witnesses to the Sacramental moma '
system of the Catholic religion."* It is of course on this account
above all that these things are valued by those who adopt them.
These earnest men woidd indignantly reject the supposition that
they are agitating the Church for any thing which serves merely
to gratify a refined taste, and has not in their eyes a very deep
doctrinal significance. The question, therefore, is forced upon us ;
Is the doctrine thus symbolized the doctrine of the Reformed
Church of England, which has dropped these symbols, or that of
the Church of Rome, which retains them?
There may be persons to whom it may appear that this ques-
tion admits but of one answer, that of the latter is this doc-
alternative. This, however, evidently depends on the the church
. of England
further inquiry, Whether the doctrine is one of those on or of Rome?
which the two Churches are at variance, or of those on which they
agree with one another. Now, however it may be as to doctrine
in the proper sense, I think it can hardly be denied that there is
a very wide and important difference between the general view
which our Church takes of her Liturgy, and the Roman view of
the Mass. The difference is marked by their several names and
descriptions. The one is an Office for the Administration of the
Lord's Supper, or Holy Communion ; the other, for the celebration
of a sacrifice. The difference indicated by the titles is equally
conspicuous in the contents of the two Liturgies. In the Anglican,
the idea which is almost exclusively predominant is that of Com-
munion. There is, indeed, an Offertory, and an oblation of
common things for sacred and charitable uses. There is mention
of a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving,! which appears to include
* " Direetorium Anglioanum," Preface, p. xiv.
t " This our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving."
VOL. II. M
162
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
the whole rite ; and the communicants " offer and present them-
selves, their souls and bodies, as a living sacrifice." But of any-
other kind of sacrifice, and particularly of any sacrificial oblation
of the consecrated elements, there is not a word. The Consecra-
tion is immediately followed by the Communion, which is the
great business of the whole. On the other hand, the Council of
Trent pronounces an anathema on those who say that there is not
offered to God in the Mass a true and proper sacrifice, or that the
offering consists only in Christ's being given to us for manduca-
tion ; or that the sacrifice of the Mass is only one of praise and
thanksgiving, or a bare commemoration of the sacrifice performed
on the Cross, and not propitiatory. A more direct conflict of
views, if they are supposed to relate to the same subject, or to two
subjects not essentially different from one another, it would be
difficult to conceive ; for that which the Council so emphatically
denies to be the sacrifice of the Mass, is the only thing to which
our Church gives the name of her sacrifice. That which the
Council declares to be the true and proper sacrifice of the Mass, is
an offering as to which our Church is absolutely silent.
Harmony It might have seemed to any one who read our Com-
DOwWB6D
Ritualists munion Office, a strange and hopeless undertaking to
and Roman
Catholics on bring it into harmonv with the Mass : and I think that
the Commu- 0 J
mon Office. Ritualists w]j0 have made the attempt, have failed to
produce any thing more than a deceptive show of resemblance ;
but of the harmony between their own views and those of the
Church of Rome in this respect, they have given the most
unequivocal signs. The rite which they celebrate they describe
as the Sacrifice of the Altar, or the Mass. The splendour with
which they invest it is certainly more appropriate to the oblation
of a sacrifice than to the reception and participation of a gift.
And, feeling that this would still be insufficient for the purpose,
they interpolate our Office with large extracts from the Canon of
the Mass, in which the sacrifice is explicitly announced, and which
the " celebrant " is directed to use as private prayers.* I must own
* See " Suggestions for the Due and Reverent Celebration of the Holy Eucharist,"
printed for the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament.
CHARGES.
1G3
that there is something in this adulteration, — as I think I may not
improperly term it, — of the Prayer Book out of the Missal, which
to my sense has an unpleasant savour of artifice and disingenuous-
ness. It is a proceeding of which I think both Churches have
reason to complain : the one, that her mind is not only disregarded,
but misrepresented ; the other, that her treasures are rifled to
set off her adversary with a false semblance of likeness to herself.
But still all this does not amount to a proof that there has been
any departure from the express teaching of our Church „
J r r o Repudiation
with regard to the Sacrament. And in one important ao<^rineby
particular there can be no doubt that those who carry Rltualists-
the assimilation of ritual to the greatest length, most decidedly
and sincerely repudiate the Romish doctrine. "With our twenty-
eighth Article, — -whether for the reasons there assigned or not, —
they reject the dogma of Transubstantiation. So indeed they
might do, with perfect consistency, even if they used the Roman
Liturgy without curtailment or alteration ; for to those who have
studied the subject, it is well known that the Canon of the Mass
is so far from teaching that dogma, that it positively witnesses
against it, and can only be reconciled with it by the most violent
artifices of interpretation.* The Canon had been fixed many
centuries before the dogma was defined. And here I cannot
refrain from pausing for a moment to remark, that there is perhaps
no head of theological controversy in which our Church stands in
more advantageous contrast with Rome, or in which we have more
reason thankfully to recognize her characteristic moderation, than
this. The tenet of Transubstantiation, decreed as an ^
' Transub-
article of faith, combines in itself the two extremes of 6tantiatlon-
irreverent rationalism and presumptuous dogmatism. As a specu-
lation of the Schools, it is essentially rationalistic ; a bold and vain
attempt to pry into mysteries of faith impenetrable to human
reason. As a dogma, it exhibits the spectacle of a Church so
* The consecration is followed by the prayer : " Supra qure propitio et sereno vultu
respicere digneris, et accepta habere sicuti accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri
tui justi Abel, et sacrificium Patriarchs; nostri Abrahro, et quod tibi obtulit Summus
Sacerdos tuus Melchidezech sanctum Sacrificium, immaculatam Hostiam." What a
comparison, when Jesus Christ Himself is supposed to be on the altar !
M 2
104
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
forgetful of her proper functions, as to undertake to give a Divine
sanction to a purely metaphysical theory, the offspring of a system
of profane philosophy. This rationalistic dogmatism gives an
imposing air of solidity and compactness to much in the Roman
theology which, on closer inspection, proves to be utterly hollow
and baseless. A conclusion is reached through a process of vicious
ratiocination, composed of ambiguous terms and arbitrary assump-
tions. In itself it is " a fond thing vainly invented." But it is
withdrawn from all inquiry, and stamped with the character of a
Divine revelation, by means of the dogma of Papal or Conciliar
infallibility. This however, when examined, turns out to be
itself the product of a like abuse of reason. We are reminded of
the Indian cosmology, in which the earth rests on the elephant,
the elephant on the tortoise, and the tortoise — on empty space,
in what The Church of England, on the contrary, has dealt with
j*arded6by this subject in a spirit of true reverence as well as of
the Church • ct
of England, prudence and charity.* She asserts the mystery inherent
in the institution 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 Transub-
stantiation, or of the grossly carnal notions to which it gave rise,
and which, in the minds of the common people, are probably
inseparable from it, I think there can hardly be any description
of the Real Presence, which, in some sense or other, is universally
allowed, that would not be found to be authorized by the language
of eminent divines of our Church ; and I am not aware, and do
not believe, that our most advanced Ritualists have in fact over-
stepped those very ample bounds.
Eucharistic But ^ am not 80 8ure *na* ^ is possible to reconcile
sacrifice. tneir yiew of the Eucharistic Sacrifice with that of the
Church of England, or to distinguish it from that of the Church
of Rome. The subject is one which requires the utmost precision
of thought and language, to avoid either falling into or giving
* See however Appendix D.
CHARGES.
1G5
occasion for misconception. At every step we are in danger of
being misled by ambiguous terms, and of reasoning upon them
in a sense different from tbat in which they are used by those
with whom we contend. I wish very much to keep this present
to my own mind and to yours in that which I am about to say.
The Council of Trent anathematizes those who affirm „ .„ ..
Propitiation
that the Sacrifice of the Mass is not propitiatory, or that "Jof the""
it benefits only the receiver, or communicant ; or that it ass'
ought not to be offered for quick and dead, to have remission of
pain and guilt. The word propitiatory is one of those which
admit of two senses : the one, strict and proper ; the other, loose
and inexact. It might be understood to mean nothing more than
acceptable to God, as that " living sacrifice " of our bodies, spoken
of by St. Paul, or as our common prayers made in the name of
Christ. In this sense it might not unfitly, though imprudently,
because in a way so very liable to misapprehension and abuse, be
applied to that memorial of the one only real propitiation, which
the Church makes in her Eucharist. This, however, is most
certainly not the sense in which the Church of Rome asserts that
the Sacrifice of the Mass is propitiatory ; for she regards it, not
indeed as a repetition of the offering made on the Cross, but neither
as a simple commemoration of that. It is, in her view, a repeti-
tion of the Sacrifice which she holds to have been actually made,
not merely signified as a thing to come, at the Last Supper, for
the remission of the sins of the Apostles and of many.* There
can therefore be no doubt in what sense she directs the priest, at
* Bellarmin, " De Missa," i. c. xii. : " Christus in ultima Corna seipse sub specie
panis et vini Deo Patri obtulit, et idipsum jussit fieri ab Apostolis ct eoruin succes-
soribus usque ad mundi consummationem. Sed hoc est saerificium vere ac proprio
dictum obtulisse, et offerondum instituisse." So, in nearly the same words, Bona,
" Rerum Liturgicarum," i. c. 4. Melcbior (Janus, " Do Locis Theologicis," xii. c. 12,
draws a distinction between the efficacy of the Sacrifice of the Cross and that of the
Last Supper: "Aha efficientia hostiaj illius est, quani Christus palam mactavit in
cruce : alia illius est quam sub speciebus definitis mystice prcebuit in coona. Ilia
generalis est, nec per saerificium modo, sed per omnia sigillatim sacramenta ad effecta
longe di versa applicatur. Haec peculiaris efficientia est, et sub speciebus certis ad
peculiaria qua?dam effecta concluditur. Obtulit ergo Christus in cc«na turn pro culpa
veniali, turn pro poena quas pro culpa etiam mortali deberetur." The Bishop of
Brechin (Primary Charge, 2nd edit. p. 52) goes no farther than to say, "At that first
Eucharist that Sacrifice was presented to the Father before it was made."
1G6
BISHOP THIRLTVALL'S
the close of the Mass, to pray that the sacrifice which he has
offered " may be acceptable unto God, and propitiatory for himself
and all for whom he has offered it." "What, then, must we infer
identity of ^rom tne ^act tnat ^his veiT prayer is one of those which
doctrine*0 are recommended for the use of our clergy in the admin-
istration of the Lord's Supper at the corresponding part
of the Office ? * Must we not conclude that it is in the very same
sense that, in a manual of devotion accredited by the same
authority, the celebration of our Liturgy is described as a " Sacri-
fice of praise and propitiation," in which our Lord, "through
His own presence communicates the virtues of His most precious
death and passion to all His faithful, living and departed ?"t
I do not see how this language is to be reconciled with the
Contrary to doctrine of our Church, even as expounded bv divines of
the Church
of England, that school which takes the highest view of the Eucha-
ristic Sacrifice. But if we suppose that it is meant to express
sound Anglican doctrine in Roman phraseology, how strong must
be the leaning towards Rome which prompts the use of her
language, where it is apparently most at variance with the sense
which the authors intend to convey ! The words which I was
just now reading may have reminded you that the strongest con-
demnatory language to be found in our Articles is that of the
Thirty-first, where " the sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was
commonly said that the priest did offer Christ for the quick and
the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt," are branded with
the name of " blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits." In the
celebrated Tract xc. it was contended, that the censure of the
Article was aimed, not at the creed of the Roman Church, but at
certain opinions which were no essential parts of her system ; and
that it " neither speaks against the Mass in itself, nor against its
being an offering for the quick and the dead for the remission of
Bin, but against its being viewed as independent of or distinct from
the Sacrifice of the Cross. "J I am not just now concerned to
inquire whether this opinion is well founded or not, or how far
* Suggestions, &c.
t The Manual of the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament, p. 29.
X See Appendix C.
CHARGES.
167
the Church of Rome is irrevocably pledged to that exposition of
the decrees of Trent which was given by her great apologists, and
which is now generally received by all members of her commu-
nion. I would only observe that the doubt itself implies that the
language of the decrees is in perfect harmony with that exposition,
even if it admits of an explanation which would bring it nearer to
doctrine which may be held in the Church of England. When
therefore that language is used, as it is, in forms of devotion
which are recommended as private accompaniments of the ritual
which is studiously assimilated to that of Rome, without any
qualifying explanation, it can only be understood in the sense
generally received, — a sense in which even the author of Tract xc.
did not profess to believe that it could be reconciled with the
teaching of our Church, or with what he then held to be the
truth. And again, I desire you to observe, if the language is
supposed to be borrowed in a different and sounder sense, how
strong must be the predilection which it indicates for every thing
that has the Roman stamp upon it.
This close approximation to Roman views and practice, in con-
nection with the predominance assigned to that sacrificial aspect
of the Lord's Supper, which it is so difficult even to detect in the
English Service Book, over that of the Sacrament, which there
alone meets the eye, is especially conspicuous in the kind of
encouragement given by clergymen of the Ritualistic Attendance
school to the attendance of non-communicants during munieants.
the celebration.* Services exactly corresponding to the Low
Masses of the Church of Rome, are multiplied in their churches,
without any design of affording additional opportunities of com-
municating, for congregations in which few are expected or
desired to be more than listeners ; most indeed not so much : for
as they are provided with " manuals of devotion to be used at the
celebration of the Holy Eucharist by such as do not communi-
cate," they may be as little aware of what is said and done at the
Holy Table, as if they were outside the door, and only apprised
of the moment of consecration by the tinkling of a bell. The
See Appendix D.
168
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
practical question is one of some little difficulty. I should think
it a most unwarrantable encroachment on the rights of conscience
to compel any of the congregation to withdraw, if they wish to
remain, though without any intention of communicating. This
of course must needs be left to every one's discretion. But I
should also consider it as an intrusion into the sanctuary of
private devotion, absolutely and indiscriminately to condemn or
discourage such attendance. I fully admit that there may be
many cases in which it may tend to edification, without the
slightest tinge of superstition. I expressed the same opinion in
a Charge several years ago, and I see no reason for changing it
now. But attendance simply with a view to edification, is one
thing : attendance in the belief that the proper benefit of the
ordinance may be enjoyed without reception, seems to me another
and quite a different thing. This, if I am not mistaken, and not,
as has been argued, a vulgar error, by which it was supposed
that the Sacrifice of the Cross itself is repeated in every Mass,
was the doctrine which lay at the root of the practice condemned
by the Thirty-first Article.* From this doctrine naturally sprang
Origin of the indefinite multiplication of solitary Masses, each of
solitary
Masses. which was held to possess a certain inherent value,
quite distinct from that of the Sacrifice of the Cross, though not
independent of it, and which might be applied, according to the
intention of the priest, either to the living, or, which was the
more frequent occasion of that multiplication, to the departed, for
the purpose of obtaining their release from Purgatory. The
abuses reproved by the Council of Trent were only casual inci-
dents of the practice, and in no way necessary consequences of
the doctrine, which the Council distinctly asserted, expressly
" approving of those Masses in which the priest alone communi-
cates sacramentally," and on the ground, that " they are celebrated
by the public minister of the Church, not for himself only, but
for all the faithful who belong to the Body of Christ " — in other
words, as our Article has it, " for the quick and the dead."
When the doctrine is received among ourselves, it will be only
* See Appendix C.
CHARGES.
169
the effect of outward temporary restraints, if it is not accompanied
by the practice which the Article condemned, not indeed simply
by itself, but along with, though not solely or mainly on account
of, its incidental gross and shameless abuses, the recurrence of
which, it may be hoped, we have no reason to fear.
But this ritual movement has by no means reached its term.
It is still in the full vigour of its early years. It spread of
appears to be advancing both extensively, in the work of Eltualism-
proselytism, and intensively, in doctrinal innovation, not always
distinctly enunciated but clearly intimated. Its partizans seem
to vie with one another in the introduction of more and more
startling novelties, both of theory and practice. The adoration of
the consecrated Wafer, reserved for that purpose, which is one of
the most characteristic Romish rites, and a legitimate consequence
of the Romish Eucharistic doctrine, is contemplated, if it has not
been already adopted, in some of our churches, and the Romish
Festival of the Corpus Christi instituted for the more conspicuous
exercise of that adoration, has, it appears, actually begun to be
observed by clergymen of our Church. Already public honours
are paid to the Virgin Mary, and language applied to her, which
can only be considered as marking the first stage of a develop-
ment, to which no limit, short of the full Romish worship, can be
probably assigned.
In the presence of these facts, the statement of the Committee
of the Lower House of Convocation, that — " in the „ „
Its Rome-
larger number of the practices which were brought ^^£1
under their notice, they could trace no proper connexion med'
with the distinctive teaching of the Church of Rome," — seems
much better fitted to excite surprise, than to administer conso-
lation, or inspire confidence. But it was to me still more
surprising to hear from one speaking in another place, with the
weight of high authority, and under very grave responsibility* — a
most deliberate and solemn declaration of his belief, " that this
present movement is not a movement towards Rome." And yet,
paradoxical as it may seem, I will own that there is a sense in
* Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 9, 1866, p. 165.
170
uishop thirlwall's
which I can myself believe that this movement is not a movement
towards Rome. Not certainly in the sense that it has any other
direction. Not in the sense that its "ultimate end and aim" —
as has been said by one who appears to have had means of under-
standing it thoroughly — is any thing less than " to make the
doctrine, practice, and worship of the Anglican Church as nearly
as possible identical with the Roman."* In that sense I cannot
doubt that it is a very decided and rapid movement towards
in what Rome. But in another sense I might sav, though I
sense this .
maybe true, should not think it a happy way of expressing my
meaning, that this present movement — and I should lay great
stress on the word present — is not a movement toward Rome. I
believe that many at least of those who are most actively engaged
in it are not at present contemplating secession from the Church
of England, and do not even desire that it should be immediately
absorbed in the Church of Rome. I may say indeed that, with
regard to a considerable number of them, there are clear proofs
that this is not their present bent or aim. That which they have
in view is quite another thing : something indeed which I can
only regard as a dream and a delusion, but which as long as they
cherish this delusion, will keep them in their present position.
Their real object has been lately brought somewhat prominently
under public notice, by some very remarkable documents, which
at the same time afford the best means of forming a judgment on
its prospects of success.
Association From them we learn that a Society has been founded
for the Pro- *
Ih^unityof un(ler *ne name of an " Association for the Promotion of
chnsten- ^e Unity of Christendom," whose common bond of
union is an earnest desire for the visible reunion of all Chris-
tendom, especially of the three chief communions, the Roman
Catholic, the Eastern, and the Anglican : the agency to be
employed for compassing the end, being for the present simply
intercessory prayer. The Society was composed chiefly of English
Churchmen, clergy and laity ; but as some Roman Catholics had
been induced to join it, it attracted the attention of their Bishops,
* See Archdeacon Wordsworth's speech in the debate on Ritual.
CHARGES.
171
who referred the matter to the supreme authority at Rome (the
Congregation of the Holy Office of the Inquisition), which issued
a rescript condemning the Association, and enjoining the faithful
to beware of uniting themselves with it under peril of condemned
heresy. This document drew forth a letter addressed to by Eome'
its author, Cardinal Patrizi, Prefect of the Holy Office, and
signed by 198 clergymen of the Church of England, including
some of its dignitaries, in which they more distinctly explain the
precise nature of their object, which they thought the Cardinal
had misunderstood.* They disclaim the intention which had
been imputed to them, of seeking " that the three communions in
their integrity, and each persisting in its persuasion, might
simultaneously combine into one ; " which they admit to be " a
scheme, from which no ecclesiastical unity could be hoped for."
They explain that their object is confined to an inter- object of
communion between the three Churches as distinct, he Society-
independent bodies, like that which existed between East and
West before the separation. They state that they have worked
many years to hasten this result : that they have effected improve-
ments beyond their hopes, where there was any thing imperfect in
the faith of the flock, in divine worship, and clerical discipline,
and that they have shown an amount of good will toward the
venerable Church of Pome, which has " rendered them suspected
in the eyes of some." This last statement will, I think, both
receive and reflect light, if it is compared with the fact which we
had just now before us.
It seems surprising that any one moderately acquainted
with the history and character of the Papacy, should Hopeiess-
neBsoftbe
have thought it possible that such a proposal should scheme,
ever be entertained at Rome. And perhaps, but for the inter-
ference of the Roman Catholic Bishops, it might have been long
before the desires of the Association were embodied in one, so as
to call forth the judgment of Rome upon it. The reply of
Cardinal Patrizi, energetically enforced by the highest Roman
* The whole correspondence may be found at the end of Archbishop Manning's
"Reunion of Christendom, a Pastoral Letter to Clergy," &c.
172
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
Catholic authority in this country, must, I think, have convinced
the most sanguine of the utter hopelessness of the attempt under
present circumstances, or indeed without such a change in the
spirit and the principles of the Church of Rome as would almost
supersede the necessity of any formal reconciliation.* But
whether those who have been thus rejected and rebuked will
patiently acquiesce in their failure and disappointment — whether,
when they find that all their advances towards Rome in a growing
conformity of faith, worship, and discipline have not brought
them one step nearer to the attainment of their object ; when
they observe that the differences which separate them from the
great mass of the members of their own communion are enormously
greater than those which lie between them and Rome, and which
are constantly decreasing, — while they know and are frequently
reminded that an act of dutiful submission to that " venerable
Church " will at once place them not in a mere intercommunion
but in the enjoyment of full communion with her- — whether, I
say, under such circumstances it will be possible for them long to
maintain their present ambiguous, intermediate position, and not,
however reluctantly, to be carried down, as by an eddy : this it
remains for the future to disclose. If we were to listen to the
experience of the past, we could hardly feel a doubt as to the
final result.
views of But I find that in other quarters among us persons
tioaofthe entitled to the highest respect, and of unquestionable
Church on or' ~L
unity- attachment to our Church, are strongly persuaded that
the signs of our times are peculiarly favourable to the prospect of
a restoration of unity in Christendom, though there appears to be
a very wide difference among them as to the means by which the
end is to be compassed. Some ground their hopes on the fact
that, as in Italy political unity has been accompanied by religious
liberty, a door has been thrown open for the doctrines of the
Reformation, which perhaps were never entirely stamped out
* It does not, however, prevent the English Church Union from regarding
" Ritualism as a means of promoting ultimately the intercommunion of the whole
Catholic Church." Report of the President and Council of the English Church Union
on the Report of the Lower House of Convocation on Ritual.
CHARGES. 173
there, to be re- admitted and have free course. The general
alienation of the people from the Court of Rome and the temporal
claims of the Papacy, has been thought Likely to win favour for
the foundation of an independent national Church on the platform
of primitive doctrine, worship, and government, not unlike, and
in full communion with, our own. That such a prospect should
attract and should awaken a lively interest in the minds of earnest
and pious English Churchmen is perfectly natural, and we cannot
but sympathize warmly with their motives and general aims.
How far the means hitherto adopted are suited to the moral and
religious condition of the country, now in the throes of a great
political crisis, it is very difficult for a foreigner to judge. But
one thing is clear. The immediate tendency of such a movement
will not be to restore unity, but to multiply divisions and to
foment religious discord. That may, under the' gracious over-
ruling of Divine Providence, be only a transition to a state of
unity and concord. But it is certainly possible, and to human
eyes quite as probable, that those who think they are laying the
foundation of a national reformed Church, may find that they
have only been planting a hotbed of sects, which as they spring
up will kill one another, and leave the Church of Rome more
powerful than before.*
Here, however, all is intelligible and consistent. I cannot
say so much with regard to the hopes which I see are unity with
still cherished by some eminent persons of a reconcilia- basis of a
common
tion with the Church of Rome on the basis of a common doctrine,
doctrine ; still less with regard to their opinion that the present
juncture affords peculiar encouragement to such hopes. That the
spread of unbelief should have suggested, or rather have strength-
ened, the wish for such re-union, I can readily understand.
But how it has removed or lessened the obstacles which before
stood in the way, I am at a loss to comprehend. The scheme is
in the main a renewal of that which was the subject of much
* This was written before I had seen " a Memorandum on Church Reformation in
Italy, drawn up and issued with the joint sanction of the Bishops of Gibraltar and
Pennsylvania." But the perusal of it has rather confirmed than altered my opinion.
174
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
discussion and negotiation toward the end of the seventeenth
century. It was then proposed under most singularly propitious
political auspices, such as haAre never been seen since, and are not
likely to recur. The Pope of that day gave it the utmost
encouragement possible in his position. It was not in Italy but
in France, not from an Ultramontane doctor or prelate, but from
Bossuet, the champion of the Grallican liberties, that it received
its death-blow, in the declaration that his Church would never
recede from a single point of her doctrine, and particularly from
that laid down by the Council of Trent.*
Difficulties How immensely the difficulties, which then were felt
in the way
of it. to be insurmountable, have since increased, has by no
one been shown with more luminous demonstration than by the
eminent theologian, who is at once the warmest supporter and the
most authoritative expositor of the revived scheme of pacification
and reunion. From his "Eirenicon" we learn, on the one hand,
the extravagant extent to which the worship of the Virgin Mary
has been already carried in the Church of Rome, and how very
nearly it has superseded reliance on the mediation of Christ, who
is generally regarded as the terrible Judge, whose severity can
only be softened by the all-availing intercession of His more com-
passionate mother : and further, that this kind of devotion did not
even reach its culminating point in the additional honour paid to
her in the new dogma of her Immaculate Conception, but is sup-
posed to be yet far from the last stage of its development, and is
expected to yield a larger harvest of dogmatic novelties. And
while we are thus led to see how deeply the Church of Rome is
pledged to a doctrine and practice from which most of us recoil,
as one of the grossest corruptions of Christ's religion, we learn on
the other hand that, during the same period, especially during the
reign of the present Pope, the claims of the Papacy have been
* See Lettres xxi. xxii. xxviii. in the Correspondence between Leibnitz and
Bossuet (CEuvres de Bossuet, Tome xi.) Bossuet observes (Lettre xi.) that nothing
would be gained on the Protestant side, even if the Council of Trent was deprived
of all authority : " puisqu'il ne faudrait pas moins croire la Transubstantiation, le
Sacrifice, la primaute du Pape de droit divin, la priere des Saints, et celles pour les
morts, qui ont ete definies dans les Conciles precedents." The difficulty as to the
Papacy was recognized by the -author of Tract xc. in his letter to Dr. Jelf.
CHARGES.
17--)
making continual progress, and have now reached the length of
despotic authority in the Church, and of a perpetual divine inspi-
ration, ensuring his infallibility far beyond the limits of faith and
morals assigned to it by the most strenuous asserters of the Papal
supremacy in former ages.
To these facts I must add another, which appears to me of no
slight significance in the present question — that the increasedby
. . . the attitude
highest authority among the Romanists in this country jjg^^gjj"
has been recently committed to one who, some fourteen ^ England
years ago, seceded from the Church of England. That church! °ur
he should take the most unfavourable view of the communion
which he left, and should be inclined to exaggerate the doctrinal
differences which separate it from that of his adoption, was almost
a necessity of his position, to guard himself against the imputation
of rashness, in quitting his old home on light grounds, and a little
detracts from the weight of his new opinions among his old, if
not among his new friends. But that which appears to me most
significant in that selection is, that the same person is the most
strenuous among the advocates of Ultramontane views of Papal
authority, and would be the last to accept any overtures for
reconciliation on any other terms than those of unconditional
submission. On this point his published declarations have been
most explicit and distinct, and it is not his fault if any person or
body outside the Church of Rome expects to be received into it
otherwise than as a pardoned penitent.
With this history in his mind, and this state of things before
his eyes, and recorded and described by himself for the Subgt f
instruction of others, the author of the " Eirenicon" says, the 80heme-
as the sum of the whole matter, and speaking, no doubt, in the
name of many followers : " On the terms which Bossuet we hope
would have sanctioned, we long to see the Church united ; "* and
beHeving that there are individuals in the Roman Communion,
who, in their hearts share that longing, he says : "To such we
stretch forth our hands : " t of course, for such help as individuals
can give ; not, it would seem, in this case, a very solid ground of
• Page 335. f Page 334.
176
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
hope. I do not, however, presume to say that the course of events
may not be shaped by Divine Providence to such a result. But
I think I may venture to believe that, before this comes to pass, a
revolution must have taken place in the Church of Rome, by
which the Pope has been made not only to abdicate his usurped
authority, but to declare many acts of his own and of his prede-
cessors, done in the exercise of that authority, null and void.
God grant that such a day may come. But even then I should not
have expected that the compromise would have been quite satis-
factory to divines of that school which insists on the most rigorous
preciseness of dogmatical definition, but should have thought it
likely to be rather more congenial to some who are reproached
with the breadth of their views. And I am not sure that there
would not still be danger of confusion and misunder-
If practic- °
wouiaieaa standing. What seems to be contemplated as the basis
to confusion. Q£ agreement is, that the Decrees of Trent should be
read by Anglicans in the Anglican sense, the Thirty -nine Articles
by Roman Catholics in the Roman sense. The case would be
something like that of a system of imitative signs, such as are
used in some parts of the East, common to several nations speak-
ing wholly different languages. The same document, written in
these characters, might be read by two persons, to whom it con-
veyed the same ideas, but who expressed them by sounds which
made the readers mutually unintelligible, each, as the Apostle
terms it, " a barbarian " unto the other. Only a bystander of
superior information could know that they meant the same thing.
I must not, however, omit to express my own conviction that the
Articles are, not in sound only but in sense, at irreconcilable
variance with the Decrees of the Council. So it has appeared
both to Anglican and to Roman Catholic writers, on a careful
comparison of their statements on controverted points.* And
* Bishop Mant, who in his day passed for a High Churchman, published a little
tract (" The Churches of Borne and England compared, 1836 ") suggested by an asser-
tion of the late Lord Melbourne, who concurred with Dr. Pusey in thinking that
" Roman Catholics in all the fundamentals of Christianity agree with Protestants," for
the purpose of showing, " that as to numerous fundamental doctrines and ordinances
the Roman and the Anglican Churches are so far from being in agreement with each
other, that they are as diametrically opposed to each other as the east and the west ;"
CHARGES.
though the authority of the Pope, if it was brought to bear on
the Roman Catholic, would no doubt overrule his opinion, and
oblige him to renounce it, it could not have the same effect on the
Anglican, unless he had first admitted the Pope's infallibility, and
so had virtually become a Roman Catholic.
These remarks, though they may here and there have taken a
somewhat wider range than was absolutelv necessary _ .
a J J Reasons for
for the discussion of the Ritual question, will not, I ^^''ampie
trust, appear to any one irrelevant to it. I wished to set discussi0n-
it before you in its principal bearings, and to place it in its true
light. I believe, indeed, that on the main point I have said
nothing but what is universally known ; and I should not be sur-
prised if there were many who will smile at the pains I have been
taking to light a candle in the broad noonday to help them to see
that which is so patent to all. I should myself have thought it a
superfluous labour, if I had not observed in some quarters an
appearance of a tacit agreement to treat the fact as a kind of
sacred mystery, familiar indeed to the initiated but not to be
divulged to the profane. I can be no party to a system of con-
cealment which appears to me neither manly nor perfectly
consistent with good faith or with a plain duty to the Church ;
and I regard the prevalence of such a system as one of the least
honourable, and the most ominous signs of our time.
Nothing, in my judgment, can be more mischievous, as well as
in more direct contradiction to notorious facts, than to deny or
ignore the Romeward tendency of the movement. Its effects,
indeed, on those who are not engaged in it would be the same if
by them it was universally, though erroneously, viewed in that
light. But it might, in that case, call for a different treatment.
and this he endeavours to do by an arrangement in which passages from the Articles
and from the Decrees and Canons of Trent are confronted with each other in parallel
columns. By a like method the Rev. Mr. Estcourt, a Roman Catholic clergyman, in
a Letter published by Mr. Oakeley in the Appendix to his pamphlet on the Eirenicon,
is brought to the like conclusion ; that " No one who accepts that Council as the voice
of the Church and the guide of his faith could with a safe conscience subscribe to
the Thirty-nine Articles :" and that " it is difficult to see any other basis for the
reconciliation of Anglicans to the Catholic Church, than their renouncing the Prayer
Book and Articles, and receiving the Council of Trent."
VOL. II. N
178
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
For practical purposes it is also very important that, without
Probable pretending to foresee the actual result, we should consider
quences of ^s natural and probable consequences. I hope that my
1 sm' forebodings may be too gloomy ; but I think I see several
serious dangers looming not very far ahead. One or two of them
have been, I cannot say pointed out, but hinted at in the Report
of the Committee of Convocation, with a delicacy which was no
doubt thought to befit such a document, but which is not always
favourable to perspicuity. The greater part and the gravest
appear altogether to have escaped the Committee's observation,
unless they were meant to be concealed under the statement that
" in the larger number of the practices which had been brought
under their notice — they do not say in all of them — they can
trace no proper connexion with the distinctive teaching of the
Church of Rome." As to any danger threatening the Church of
England from such connexion as they were able to trace, or danger
of any kind on the side of Rome, the Report is entirely silent. I
wish to say a few words on this subject, and to speak a little more
plainly and fully than the Committee felt it their duty to do.
Though, as I have said, it appears to me highly probable that the
Ti „ . leaders of the movement themselves have no present
Its effect on r
Churchmen, ^^g^t 0f quitting the Anglican communion, I think it
almost inevitable that they should be giving occasion to more or
less numerous secessions to the Church of Rome, both by fostering
that general predilection for all that belongs to her, which they
themselves betray, or rather exhibit, and by stimulating a craving
for a gorgeous ritual, which, remaining where they are, they can
never fully satisfy : even if it be possible for thoughtful and
ingenuous minds long to feel quite at their ease in a form of
worship which strives to engraft, not only the outward ceremonial,
but the essential idea of the Roman Mass on the Anglican Com-
munion Office, and where the officiating priest uses language in
his private devotions quite incongruous with that which the
Church puts into his mouth. Some I think can hardly fail to
find this hybrid kind of devotion intolerable, and to be driven to
exchange it for something more real and genuine, more consistent
CHARGES.
179
and complete. That might be found either in the Church of
England or in the Church of Home. It is unhappily too clear in
which they have been trained to seek it. This is one form of the
danger in its Homeward aspect. There are others still greater,
though probably more remote. I have already endeavoured to
point out the process by which the movement may reach its
termination in the secession, not of individuals, but of a whole
party. Another form which the evil might take under different
circumstances, would be an open rent in the Church, which how-
ever might in the end lead to the same result.
But there is no less danger on the side opposed to Rome. And
this has been in some degree recognised by the Com- And on
mittee, in a passage of their Report, where they remind lssen rs'
us, " that the National Church of England has a holy work to
perform toward the Nonconformists of this country : and that
every instance, not only of exceeding the law, but of a want of
prudence and tenderness in respect of usages within the law, can
hardly fail to create fresh difficulties in the way of winning back
to our Church those who have become estranged from her commu-
nion." This is indeed an allusion to a very grave and unquestion-
able fact, but couched in terms which seem to me singularly
inappropriate, and tending to conceal both the real nature and the
extent of the danger. It might lead any one to imagine that the
Nonconformists with whom we have to deal, are, like the dissenters
from the Russian Church, such sticklers for rigid rubrical unifor-
mity, that they are likely to be scared away from us by any
deviation from the letter of the Prayer Book. I need not observe
how directly this would reverse the real state of the case, or that,
if the innovations which offend many, I believe I may still say
most Churchmen, are peculiarly obnoxious to the Nonconformists
of this country, it is not simply as innovations, but because they
present the appaarance of the closest possible approximation to the
Church of Rome. And the danger on this side is far greater than
that which is suggested by the language of the Report. It is not
merely that we may make fewer converts from the ranks of Dissent,
but that we may strengthen them by large secessions, perhaps of
N 2
180
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
whole congregations, from our own. And the danger — if I ought
not rather to say the certain and present evil — does not end there.
These proceedings both tend to widen the breach between us and
Dissenters, and to stimulate them to more active opposition, and
furnish their leaders with an instrument which they will not fail
to use for the purpose of exciting general ill will toward the
Church, and weakening her position in the country.
Bothinflu- ■^•n<^ ^ must be remembered that these injuries which
maksunui- 8^e may suffer on opposite sides may be going on
taneousiy. together simultaneously. There is nothing in the one
to lessen, nothing that must not aggravate the other. For every
proselyte who is drawn from us to Rome, we may reckon on others
who will leave us for Geneva. That this damage will be compen-
sated by any accession of numbers from either quarter is, with
regard to Dissent, in the highest degree improbable : as to Rome,
it is neither pretended nor desired.
object of The object for which the Committee was appointed,
the Com- _ _ _ , #
mittee of was entirelv practical. It was " to inquire as to such
Convocation *
on Eituai. measures as might seem to them fit for clearing the
doubts and allaying the anxieties " which the Lower House had
represented as existing upon the subject of Ritual, and as calling
for consideration. It was highly proper that, before they pro-
ceeded to perform this task, they should take a view of the state
of the case on which they were to advise : and it is only to be
regretted that this view was somewhat oblique and one-sided.
Their practical proposals, however, though in them must be sup-
posed to lie the whole fruit of their deliberations, and the pith and
essence of the Report, while all the rest, however valuable, was
only preparatory and incidental, are, with one notable exception,
How they purely negative, and inform the House what in their
fulfilled it. 0pmion ought not to be done. But even this rather
scanty amount of information is very imperfectly and ambiguously
conveyed. They deprecate a resort to judicial proceedings, as
tending to promote, rather than to allay dissension. But in the
sentence immediately preceding, they had expressed an earnest
wish, that such a course might not be found necessary ; clearly
CHARGES.
181
implying that it might be found necessary ; but leaving the reader
to guess both what kind or case of necessity they had in their
minds, and whether in that event it would still in their opinion
have the same evil tendency. It would, I think, have been
desirable that they should have stated whether in their opinion it
was to be wished, that the present obscurity and uncertainty in
the state of the law should be removed, and whether they knew
of any way by which this could be effected without a resort to
judicial proceedings. We know from an eminent member of their
own body how utterly inadequate any opinion of counsel is for
such a purpose. Though deprived of the benefit of their ^j^'?^
guidance on this important point, I venture to think S"sPwmuad"
there are two conditions on which a moral necessity for Sry!eces"
resort to judicial proceedings would arise.* The one would be, if
any clergyman should attempt to introduce the Ritual innovations
in his parish church against the will of any considerable part of
his congregation : and the other, if he should persist in so doing
after having been admonished and dissuaded by his Bishop. I
consider every such attempt as an audacious and culpable aggres-
sion on the rights of the parishioners, which I should wish to
see repressed, either by judicial or even, if necessary, though
I should exceedingly deplore the necessity, by legislative inter-
ference.
But I am not for the present prepared to lay down any more
absolute and comprehensive rule of action, though many persons
— some of them worthy of all respect — call loudly for General rule
the interposition of authority in every case, to put down 0 ac on'
the excess of Ritualism, wherever it shows itself : and therefore
• I am here assuming that the Ritual innovations are introduced hy Incumbents,
and not by Stipendiary Curates ; a thing of which I happen never to have heard,
though Sir H. Thompson, in a Speech delivered in the debate in Convocation, which
he has published in a pamphlet entitled, " Ritualism, a pica for the Surplice," seems
to suppose that it is a very common, if not the most common case, and on this fact
grounds a charge of want of "vigour" against tho bishops, on whom it is always
easy and pleasant to lay the blame of every thing amiss in the Church. It would
of course be easy to revoke tho Licence of a " contumacious stipendiary Curate,"
but it does not seem to me at all clear that " such a step," by " provoking an
appeal to the Primate," from whose decision there would be no further appeal,
would " secure a speedy and satisfactory settlement of the question."
182
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
even where the whole of the bulk of the congregation earnestly
desire it, and none take offence at it. On the same principle on
which I would interfere for the protection of parishioners, on
whom their minister attempts to force a novelty which they dis-
like, I should scruple to deprive a congregation of a form of
worship which has become dear to them, though it is one of
which I disapprove. And here we must be on our guard against
exaggerating the importance of outward forms, and supposing
that some great thing has been gained when they have been sup-
pressed, though the opinions of which they are the visible
exponents remain unchanged. Here I agree with the Committee,
when they deprecate any attempt to establish a rule applicable to
all places and congregations alike. I consider a uniformity which
does not represent, but is the substitute for unanimity, as a very
questionable blessing. I adopt the maxim of the Committee on a
much higher authority. It was not in the spirit of our last Act
of Uniformity, but under the guidance of one as opposite to that
as light to darkness, tbat St. Paul wrote those ever memorable
words for the perpetual rebuke of all narrow-mindedness and
tyrannical encroachments on the rights of conscience and Christian
liberty : " Ono man esteemeth one day above another : another
esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be persuaded in his own
mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord ;
and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not
regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God
thanks ; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and
giveth God thanks."
The only I observe that there was one notable exception to tbe
remedy
suggested, generally negative character of the practical measures
suggested by the Committee, and therefore I am perhaps bound
to notice it. It seems that some of them shared the opinion of
those who consider the paucity of Bishops as the chief root of
evil in the Church ; and applying this principle to the present
case, they remark that " both excesses and defects in ritual obser-
vance are symptoms of a deep-seated evil, namely, the want of a
more effective working of the Diocesan system." This is the
CHARGES.
183
gloomiest view that has yet been taken of the subject. It shows
that, except for tho sako of this particular disclosure, the appoint-
ment of the Committee was totally useless ; and that, as the
remedy of tho evil depends on a contingency indefinitely remote,
namely, an adequate multiplication of Bishops, the case is prac-
tically hopeless. It is thereforo to myself a comfort to believe,
that the remark is simply the offspring of some fervid imagination,
without any foundation iu fact. *
The Report concludes with a general observation, which, as
such, may be true, whether applicable or not to the Thecon-
subiect of the inquirv — "Excess of Ritualism is, in fact, arrived at
J . bytheCom-
the natural reaction from unseemly neglect of solemn mittee.
order." But it is clearly implied, that in the opinion of the Com-
mittee, the latest development of Ritualism is an instance of such
reaction. This, as I haAre already intimated, I believe to be a
mistake. That the movement in its origin some thirty years ago
was partly the effect of a reaction, I think highly probable ; but
that it is so in its present phase, I find no reason whatever to sup-
pose. And I am sorry that the Committee appear to lend their
countenance to a kind of recrimination, which I often hear, but
which does not seem to me either quite logical, or very becoming.
When a Ritualist is reproached for his innovations by a clergyman
of the opposite school, he has a favourite retort always at hand :
"If you take liberties with the Prayer Book, ' by neglect,' as the
Committee expresses it, ' of its plain rules and curtailment of its
Offices,' have I not a right to make the Liturgy as exact a copy
as I can of the Mass ? " I do not say that this argument is more
unsound than it would be to reply on the other side — though I
am not aware that this has ever been done — " If you turn the
Communion Office into a Mass, have I not a right to neglect plain
rules of the Prayer Book, and to curtail its Offices ? " It would bo
hard to say, on which side there is the more grievous lack both of
sound reason and sense of duty.
* The Report has no much the look of a mosaic of compromises, cemented by a
general disposition in favour of Ritualism, that it would be hardly fair to impute
this particular fancy to the whole Committee.
184
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
But though the Committee's observation is so questionable as to
its historical correctness, and must tend to divert attention from
the real state of the case and gist of the controversy, it may very
profitably remind us of another grave danger with which we are
threatened by the Ritual movement ; the danger, I mean, of its
Danger of producing an "unseemly neglect of solemn order,"
neglect." which is "the natural reaction from excess of Ritualism,"
even when it has no special significance, much more from that which
we are now witnessing. The jealousy and suspicion which it
unavoidably awakens in Churchmen of a different school, must
disturb the harmony which was beginning to prevail, notwith-
standing the provocations to discord and ill-will, ministered by
some of the Journals on both sides, and thus check a healthy and
uniform progress in the Church at large. The evil spirit of party
will be ever at work to magnify trifles into tests of faith, and
grounds of division, and to blind men, as well to the good which
is associated with that which they dislike, as to the evil which
mars things which are justly dear to them. Allow me, my rever-
end brethren, to warn those of you who are most adverse to the
Ritual movement, against this temptation, and to remind you that
defect is not the proper cure of excess, and that opposite exag-
gerations do not counteract, but only inflame and aggravate one
another. Suffer me to suggest to you, that some wholesome and
precious uses may be extracted from that of which, as a whole, you
may strongly disapprove. It appears to me that you may well
take occasion from it to consider, both severally, and in common,
whether there is anything amiss in your practice, anything which
might be justly described as " neglect of plain rules of the Prayer
Book, and curtailment of its Offices," and this, not merely to
guard against the censure of an adversary, but to avoid giving
offence to those whom you may look upon as the weaker brethren.
But further, I think there is a loud call upon you, not to rest
satisfied with a mere conformity to the letter of the ordinances of
our Church, but to endeavour more and more to learn her mind
and imbibe her spirit. You are not really faithful to her, if
you neglect to avail yourselves of all the means of grace which
CHARGES.
185
she commits to your stewardship, but having received two talents
— the Word and the Sacraments — make gain of the one, but hide
the other in the earth.
I would also express a hope that my younger brethren, whose
opinions on many points have still to be matured and fixed, but who
are open to conviction and earnestly seek the truth, may importance
of o. closer
be led by our present controversies to cultivate a closer study of the
primitive
acquaintance with primitive Christian antiquity than may Church,
hitherto have entered into the course of their studies, and if pos-
sible not to rest content with the information which they may
draw from secondary sources, but to go to the fountain-head, that
they may in a manner listen to the voice and gaze upon the living
features of the ancient Church. I venture to assure them that
the pleasure which they will derive from that intercourse will
more than repay any labour which it may cost them. But I
recommend the study, because I am convinced that, rightly
pursued and regulated, it will both enlighten and strengthen their
attachment to the Church in which they have been called to
minister. But for this purpose some cautions may be „ „
r c J Cautions to
needed in our day, which in other times might have beobserved-
been superfluous. One is, that the student should not look at the
primitive Church through a glass tinged with Romish or indeed
any other prejudices, and that his view should be taken down-
ward, from the standing point of antiquity to the modern Church
of Borne, not upward, from her standing point to antiquity.
Another, perhaps still more needful caution is, that he should
approach the subject in a spirit of Christian freedom, which is
perfectly consistent with the love and reverence which the image
of the ancient Church is fitted to awaken in Christian minds. He
will have to remember that he is not bound to adopt or to imitate
every thing that was said or done by his fathers in the faith, and
that when he perceives a difference of opinion or practice between
the early Church and his own, it does not necessarily follow that
his own Church is in the wrong ; as on the other hand he may
believe that she has judged and acted wisely, without absolutely
condemning the maxims and usages of a former age. If, however,
186
BISHOP THIRLWALL'8
we were to apply these general remarks to the subject which has
just been occupying our attention, we should find but little
occasion for such distinctions.
We cannot read the detailed description given by Justin
Justin Martyr of the order of administering the Eucharist in
Martyr's . ..
Hccount of his day, without joyfully recognising the closest possible
th^Eucha- resemblance, in every material point, between it and our
nst' own. We observe that there is not the slightest hint
that it was regarded as a Sacrifice, other than of prayer and
praise, or the presiding minister as a sacrificing priest, and not
simply as tho dispenser of a holy communion. The spiritual
food was received by all present, and was sent to those who were
unavoidably absent, but not offered for them. But along with
this general resemblance, we perceive some points of
Minor dif-^ ° . .
ferencesbe- difference between ancient and modern practice. Those
tween *
modem*"13 weekly assemblies of Justin's time were never held
without the celebration of the Lord's Supper. That was
the one object for which the people came together every Lord's
Day. In that respect there is indeed a very wide difference
between their usage and ours. Here I think few will say that the
advantage is on our side, though probably as few will adopt the
opinion of a learned theologian who has endeavoured to prove, by
arguments which it seems to be the peculiar privilege of Ritualists
to understand, that weekly communion is " matter of Divine
obligation," alone fulfilling the commandment of Christ, and that
the clergy who omit it, " if judged by the rule of the Apostles,
are false to their Lord's dying command in a particular from
which He left no dispensation." * Without falling into this
exaggeration we may lament the modern departure from primitive
practice in that mutilation of the Communion Office which prevails
in most of our churches. But we also know that this departure
had its origin in an abuse which has been carried to its greatest
height by the Church of Borne, in the encouragement given to
the attendance of non-communicants, which some among us are
so eager to restore. And their attempt is probably, through a
* Archdeacon Freeman in " Riles and Eitual," p. 13.
CHARGES.
187
natural though deplorahlc reaction, one main obstacle to the
general revival of the weekly Communion.
The study of primitive Christianity will also lead the thoughtful
inquirer to see and feel the contrast between the Church of the
Catacombs and the Church of the Vatican. In the marvellous
development by which the one passed into the other, he The Church
will above all admire the mysterious dealings of Divine combs and"
Providence, which, without annulling the freedom of 0fthehurch
the human will, can make even the worst of evils
minister to good. He will not deny whatever may be fairly
implied in the identity of the two, and therefore entitled to
respect ; but he will not the less clearly see the accompanying
growth of corruption and error. He will be enabled justly to
appreciate the value of the claims set up for the modern Papacy,
as the living oracle of God, the subject of a constant Divine inspi-
ration, which constitutes every Pope the supreme and unerring
arbiter in all disputes which can arise within the ever widening
sphere of opinion, as distinguished from that of exact science : so
that, though a like inspiration must have been vouchsafed to Linus
and Cletus, it was in a degree immeasurably lower than that
enjoyed by Pius IX., whose Allocutions and Encyclicals would
probably to them have been simply unintelligible. Historically,
the student will know how strangely such a claim would have
sounded in the ears of those venerable men and of the Apostolic
Fathers. And when he inquires into the ground on which this
amazing pretension is based, he finds only a fresh illustration of
that reasoning in a vicious circle which I have already noted as
characteristic of the Romish theology. A perfectly arbitrary and
precarious meaning is attached to a few texts of Scripture, to
prove the alleged infallibility ; and then the infallibility is used to
establish the certainty of the interpretation. The supercilious
arrogance which, as well as a relentless fanaticism, is naturally
engendered by this delusion, should move our deepest pity ; a
feeling like that with which we witness the serene self-complacency
visible in the features of a maniac who, confined in a narrow cell,
believes himself to be the emperor of the world.
188
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S CHARGES.
We have lately received a very solemn admonition from a
person who has since been placed at the head of the English
The church Romanists, on " the danger and the chastisement of those
and the who," like the Church of England, " would instruct the
Church of .
Rome. Church of Jesus Christ."* I do not know whether any
consciences have been disturbed by the sound of these words, which
contain the whole pith of the writer's argument. It seems enough
to observe, that the Church of England has never pretended to
instruct the Church of Jesus Christ, but has always desired to
receive and transmit its teaching. But certainly we do not regard
it as a very rash or culpable presumption, to believe that the
Church of Alexander VI., of Julius II., and Leo X., might have
something to learn, and still more to unlearn. And when we are
called upon to accept these new doctrines on the ground of our
Lord's promise, of the abiding presence of the Spirit of Truth in
His Church, we may not only rightly refuse to appropriate to a
part that which was intended for the whole, but we may reason-
ably doubt, whether that which was secured by the promise was a
perpetual preservation from error, and not rather a preservation
from perpetual error, in other words, the final prevalence of truth.
That we know is great and will prevail. With this belief let us
comfort our hearts. To this let us firmly cling amidst the surg-
ings of doubt and controversy, while we lift up our eyes to the
Father of Lights, " with Whom " alone " is no variableness,
neither shadow of turning," beseeching Him to enlighten us with
His truth, according to the measure of our need, but above all to
grant to us the higher grace of walking faithfully by the light we
have received.
* " The Crown in Council on the Essays and Reviews. A Letter to an Anglican
Friend, by Henry Edward Manning, D.D.," p. 21.
APPENDIX.
(A.)
I subjoin a list of the places referred to at p. 92, in which a work of
church building or restoration has been set on foot.
Breckn ockshire.
1. Brecon Priory Church.
2. Brynmawr.
3. Cantreff.
4. Cathedine.
5. Coelbren.
6. Llanelly.
7. Llywell.
8. Vaynor.
9. Llanfihangel Abergwessin (restoration).
10. ,, (new church).
11. Llanfechan.
12. Llanfihangel Bryn Pabuan.
Radnorshire.
13. Rhayader.
14. Abbeycwmhir.
Cardiganshire.
15. Aberystwyth.
16. Llanbadarnfawr.
17. Llangunllo.
Glamorganshire.
18. Swansea.
190
APPENDIX.
Carmarthenshire.
19. Carmarthen St. David's.
20. (new church).
21. Llanelly.
22. Llandcfeilog parish church.
• 23. ,, St. Anne's (new chapel).
24. Mydrim.
25. Henllan Amgoed.
Pembrokeshire.
20. Prendergast, Haverfordwest.
27. Mathry.
28. Amblestone.
29. Burton.
30. St. Bride's.
31. Pennar, Pembroke Dock.
32. Walwyn Castle.
33. St. Catherine's, Milford.
34. Llysyfran.
35. Manerbier.
I believe that some others might be added as in contemplation.
(B.)
It must be admitted that, in the Declaration or Protestation at the end
of the Communion Office, the Church of England has deviated from her
principles, has come down from her own vantage ground to that of her
adversary, and has stated the question in the way most favourable to the
doctrine of the Church of Borne; for it is made to turn on a purely meta-
physical proposition as to the nature of body ; " it being against the truth
of Christ's natural body to be at one time in more places than one."
This is virtually to fall into the Bomish error, and to stake the ti-uth of
her doctrine on the soundness of a scholastic speculation, which, as a
Church, she has no more right to deny, than the Church of Borne to
affirm. The real objection to Transubstantiation is, not that it is bad
philosophy, but that it is philosophy : not that it is impossible, but that
it is destitute and incapable of proof. How dangerous it would be to
rely on the proposition assumed in the Declaration as a ground for reject-
ing the dogma of Transubstantiation, may appear from the defence of it
APPENDIX.
19L
which Leibnitz sets up on the basis of his own metaphysical system.
In the posthumous " Systema Theologium " (ed.Dr. Carl Haas) he writes:
" Equideni si demonstrari posset invictis argumentis metaphysicse neces-
sitatis omnem corporis essentiam in extensione sive spatii detcrminati
implemento consistere, utique cum verum vero pugnare non possit,
fatendum esset unura corpus non posse esse in pluribus locis, ne per
divinam quidem potentiam, non magis quam fieri potest ut diagonalis sit
lateri quadrati commensurabilis. Eoque posito utique recurrendum
esset ad allegoricam divini verbi sive scripti sive traditi interpretationem.
Scd tantum abest ut quisquam philosophorum jactatam illam demonstra-
tionem absolvcrit, ut contra potius solide ostendi posse videatur exigere
quidem naturam corporis ut extensum sit, nisi a Deo obex ponatur ;
essentiam tamen corporis consistere in materia et forma substantiali : hoc
est, in principio passionis et actionis, substantias enim est agere et pati
posse."
He then makes a few remarks on some expressions of ecclesiastical
writers apparently adverse to the doctrine, among them that of Popo
Gelasius : " Gelasius Pontifex Romanus innuit panem transire in Corpus
Christi, manente natura panis, hoc est qualitatibus ejus sive accidentibus
(a most arbitrary and unwarranted interpretation) : neque enim tunc ad
metaphysicas notiones formula exigebatitur." He then proceeds to expound
his theory of matter, by which he is brought to the conclusion, " exis-
tentia pariter atque unio substantias et accitlentium realium in Dei arbitrio
est. Et cum natura rerum nihil aliud sit quam consuetudo Dei, ordinario
aut extraordinario agere aequo facilo ipsi est, prout sapientia ejus exigit."
This great genius does not seem to have perceived that the further he
dived into the depths of metaphysical speculation, the more certain it
must be that what ho would draw out would not be a legitimate theo-
logical dogma. It was a case for the application of his own wise remark
in his answer to Pirot on the authority of the Council of Trent ((Euvrcs
de Bossuet, XI. Lettre xxi. p. 105, ed 1778) : " Nous n'avons peutetre
que trop do prutendues definitions en matiere de Foi."
Lacordaire (Lettres a des jeunes gens : ed. Perreyve, p. 100) writes
to a young friend who was perplexed by the metaphysical difficulty : —
" Si vous mo dernandez maintenant comment un corps est present dans
un si petit espace et en tous les lieux a la fois, jo vous repondrais quo
nous n'avons pas la premiere idee de l'essence des corps, et qu'il n'est
pas le moins du monde certain que l'etendue divisible soit csscntielle aux
corps. Les plus grands philosophes ont pense le contrarie, et ont cru
quo les corps n'etaient qu'un compose d'atomes indivisibles uni par
l'affinite qui les attire reciproquement, et devenant etendus par l'espace qui
so glisse entr'eux, et y cause des interstices, do sorto quo plus on con-
dense un corps, c'est a dire plus on ote l'espace qu'il renferme en rappro-
chant les atomcs, moins il tient de place. Voila pour la presence dans
192
APPENDIX.
un petit espace. Quant a la presence en tous lieux, considerez que la
lumiere est un corps, et qu'elle parcourt en une seconde soixante qumze
nrille lieiws ; considerez que l'electricite est un corps, et qu'elle parcourt
en une seconde cent quinze niille lieues. Qui empeche done qu'un corps
uni a la Divinite n'ait une agilite un milliard de fois plus grande, de
maniere a toucher tous les points du globe au meme instant ? " (I must
own that I do not see the force of this illustration, as there must always
be an interval between the departure and the arrival ; but what follows
is more to the pui~pose.) " En outre desquele corps peut etre inetendu,
il n'est plus assujetti a la loi de la localite, et il peut etre present en tous
lieux, comme votre ame est presente a tous les points de votre corps,
comme Dieu est indivisiblement present a tous les points de l'univers."
All excellent reasons for abstaining from such speculations in theology.
(C.)
Mr. Newman (in Tract xc.) and Dr Pusey [Eirenicon) agree in think-
ing that Article XXXI. was intended to condemn, not any doctrine which
is and must be held by all members of the Church of Rome who acknow-
ledge the authority of the Council of Trent, but only a popular error or
abuse which every intelligent member of the Eoman Communion would
repudiate. They do not however exactly coincide with one another in
their view of the error which was condemned. In the Tract, which
I quote from Dr. Pusey's reprint, the argument is thus summed up : —
" On the whole, it is conceived that the Article before us neither
speaks against the Mass in itself nor against its being [an offering,
though commemorative,] for the quick and the dead for the remission of
sin, [(especially since the decree of Trent says, that ' the fruits of the
Bloody Oblation are through this most abundantly obtained : so far is the
latter from detracting in any way from the former) ; '] but against its
being viewed, on the one hand, as independent of or distinct from the
Sacrifice on the Cross, which is blasphemy ; and, on the other, its being
directed to the emolument of those to whom it pertains to celebrate it,
which is imposture in addition." (The words in brackets were added in
the second edition.)
Dr. Pusey writes (Eirenicon, p. 25) : —
"/The very strength of the expressions used 'of the sacrifices of
Masses,' that they ' were blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits,' the
use of the plural, and the clause, ' in the which it was commonly said '
show that what the Article speaks of is, not ' the Sacrifice of the Mass,'
APPENDIX.
193
but the habit (which, as one hears from time to time, still remains) of
trusting to the purchase of Masses when dying, to the neglect of a holy
life, or repentance, and the grace of God and His mercy in Christ Jesus,
while in health."
The view taken of the Article in Tract xc. is adopted by Mr. Medd in
his essay on the Eucharistic Sacrifice, in " The Church and the World,"
in a few passing words, p. 343, where, after quoting the words of the
Article, " Sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said that
the priest did offer Christ," he adds the interpretation (i. e. by way of
re-enacting the Sacrifice of Calvary by an actual mactation afresh) ; and
by Mr. Stuart, in his " Plea for Low Masses," in an elaborate argument,
in the course of which he says, p. 35 : "In order to understand rightly
the meaning of the Thirty-first Article, we must remember that this
Article is not directed against the Eucharist Sacrifice or the Sacrifice of
the Mass, nor indeed against any formal authoritative doctrine on this
subject whatever, but against a certain popular misapprehension of this
doctrine which had prevailed, and which manifestly impugned the sole
sufficiency of the Sacrifice of the death of Christ." The nature of this
misapprehension he had just before explained in the words : " To think
of the offering of Christ in the Holy Eucharist as an offering made inde-
pendently of His death, — to suppose that such an offering could have
been made, for instance, if He had never died," &c. And p. 37 : "As
there is but one real Sacrifice, which is Christ, once only sacrificed, i. e.
upon the Cross, it would be blasphemy to speak of sacrifices in the
plural, — the Sacrifices of Masses, for instance, — since in all the Masses
or Eucharists ever yet celebrated there has been but one real Sacrifice,
which is Christ Himself."
There is a general objection, which seems to me to stand in the way
of both these modes of interpretation. It appears to me very improbable
that the framers of the Article should have levelled it, not against any
doctrine held by the Church of Eome, but against either an error or an
abuse which had crept in among the people. This might have been
ground for charging the rulers of the Church of Rome with culpable
neglect or connivance, but would have been out of place in an Article.
If this had been the meaning, I can hardly conceive that it would have
been so expressed. For then the only hint of that which was the object
of such very severe condemnation, would be contained in the single letter
s, the sign of the plural number. From this the reader would be
expected to infer that what the authors really had in their minds was
this : " The Sacrifice of the Mass, in which the priest offers Christ for the
quick and the dead to have remission of pain or guilt ; this we admit to
be consistent with sound doctrine, but this doctrine has been corrupted
and perverted to bad ends, through a popular misapprehension as to the
nature of the offering, which is irreconcilable with the fulness and suffi-
VOL. II. o
194
APPENDIX.
ciency of the Sacrifice of the Cross. Such Masses we stigmatize as
blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits." But how does this para-
phrase, when we have it, either explain or justify the language of the
Article ? The Mass itself remained the same rite, however multiplied.
It could not be affected by any erroneous view that might be entertained
of it, still less by any unholy purpose to which it might be abused. How
then could it be consistent either with justice or common sense to speak
of the Masses themselves in terms which were only applicable, and only
meant to be applied, to the error and the abuse ? It might as well be
said that the administration of the Holy Communion becomes a blasphe-
mous fable and a dangerous deceit as often as it is received by an
unworthy communicant. The abstinence from any further allusion to
the real scope of the Article would be the more singular, because the
writer, if he had had the thought now attributed to him in his mind,
would so naturally and almost unavoidably have said, instead of " the
priest did offer Christ," " the priest did sacrifice Christ afresh." On Dr.
Pusey's supposition that the thing condemned was " the habit of trusting
to the purchase of Masses ; " beside that this would be so clearly matter of
discipline, not of doctrine, the obscurity and impropriety of the language
would be still greater, and as it appears to me, absolutely incredible.
On the other hand, if the writer of the Article believed that the Sacri-
fice of the Mass was in itself inconsistent with the doctrine of " the
one oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross," I see no difficulty in the
form of expression. He would naturally be thinking, not only of the
doctrinal error, but of the enormous practical abuses which had sprung
from it : and this would, I think, sufficiently account both for the use of
the plural, the reference to the common way of speaking, and the extreme
severity of the censure.
The Rev. Mr. Estcourt (quoted by Mr. Oakeley in his pamphlet on the
" Eirenicon," p. 73) utterly rejects Dr. Pusey's construction of the Article.
His own comment on it is : —
" False and impious: nor can it be defended on the ground of the
phrase ' Sacrifices of Masses,' being in the plural number, because the
term ' Sacrificia Missarum ' is equally correct, and has the same meaning
with ' Sacrificium Missse.' Thus, in the Missa pro Defunctis, ' anima
famuli tui his sacrificiis purgata, et a peccatis expedita.' This Article is,
therefore, nothing else than a charge of blasphemy and imposture on the
most holy Sacrifice of the Eucharist." Some persons may attach the
greater weight to this judgment as coming from a Roman Catholic priest.
Candour, however, obliges me to own that I do not set any higher value
on it on that account, and that I think Dr. Pusey's explanation of the
plural number more probable than Mr. Estcourt's. But it certainly shows
how little it was to be expected that the Article should be understood in
the sense assigned to it by Dr. Pusey. In support of his opinion, Dr.
APPENDIX.
195
Pusey reproduces a passage cited by Gieseler from a work of an Ultra-
montanist Bishop of the fourteenth century, in which the multiplication
of Masses for unholy ends is deplored and condemned. Dr. Pusey's
object seems to be to show that the abuse to which alone he supposes
the Article to refer was, so far from being a doctrine of the Church of
Eome, that long before the Reformation it had been censured in the
strongest terms by one who was an Ultramontanist Bishop, and even a
Penitentiary of Pope John XXII. But to me this fact appears not at all
to strengthen Dr. Pusey's argument, but to lead to the opposite conclu-
sion, as it makes it the more improbable that the Article was meant
simply to condemn an abuse which was acknowledged, lamented, and
reprobated within the Church of Rome itself. But I must further
observe that this extract foom Alvarus Pelagius, de Planctu Ecclesioe, has
another bearing on the meaning of our Article, which Dr. Pusey seems
to have overlooked, at all events has not noticed. It contains an allusion
to a remarkable fact, which the writer explains so as to suit his purpose.
" Whence also St. Francis willed that the brothers everywhere should be
content with one Mass, foreseeing that the brothers would wish to
justify themselves by Masses, and reduce them to a matter of gain, as we
see done at this day." The words of St. Francis himself deserve to be
quoted, both on their own account, and that their import may be better
understood. They occur in Epistola XII. (Francisci Assisiatis opera
omnia : ed. von der Burg).
" Moneo praeterea et exhortor in Domino, ut in locis in quibis moran-
tur fratres, una tantum celebretur Missa in die secundum formam sanctas
Romana? Ecclesiae. Si vero in loco plures fuerint sacerdotes, sic sit per
amorem charitatis alter contentus audita celebratione sacerdotis alterius,
quia absentes et prassentes replet, qui eo digni sunt, Dominus Noster
Jesus Christus. Qui licet in pluribus locis reperiatur, tamen indivisibilis
manet et aliqua detrimenta non novit, sed unus verus, sicut ei placet,
operatur, cum Domino Deo Patre et Spiritu Paracleto in saccula saecu-
lorum."
On the ground of this passage, as we learn from Cardinal Bona (Rer.
Lit. i. c. 14, p. 387), the authority of St. Francis was pleaded against the
private Mass : " En, inquiunt (Sectarii), vir Dei unam duntaxat in die
Missam admittit, idque secundum formam Romanae Ecclesiae. Porro
Catholici vim hujus objectionis variis modis declinare nituntur." He
then enumerates several of these methods, all more or less strained and
improbable. Others had, on this ground alone, pronounced the letter a
forgery. Bona himself is quite satisfied as to its genuineness, and offers
his own solution of the difficulty. " Ego admissa epistola tanquam vera
et legitima, sumptam ex ea objectionem nullo negotio dilui posse exis-
timo, si dixerimus Seraphicum Patrem, qua humilitate a Sacerdotii
susceptione ipse abstinuit, eadem hortari suos ne quotidie celebient."
o 2
196
APPENDIX.
And as to the words " secundum formam Romanae Ecclesise," which had
been misunderstood to apply to the single daily celebration, he observes :
" Optime noverat plures in die fieri celebrationes : sed sicut in regula
prascepit, ut fratres officium recitarent secundum morem Romanae
Ecclesias, ita hie monet ut secundum formam ejusdem Ecclesia? agantur
Miss83 : turn humilitatis causa, et ne Sacerdotes ex frequenti celebratione
tepidiores fierent hortatur ut unica celebratione, cui omnes interessent,
contenti, reliquis abstinerent."
Bona, we see, entirely differs from Alvarus Pelagius, and does not
suppose that St. Francis either saw or foresaw any abuse of the private
Mass. The private Mass itself was never admitted by any Roman
authority to be an abuse, and it received the express approbation of the
Council of Trent. " Nec Missas illas in quibus solus Sacerdos sacramen-
taliter communicat, ut privatas et illicitas damnat, sed probat atque adeo
commendat " [here the plural Missa is certainly equivalent to the sin-
gular]. If, therefore, the Thirty-first Article only condemns flagrant
abuses, and is supposed to allow that which it does not condemn, we are
brought to the rather startling conclusion that it tacitly sanctions, not
only the sacrifice of the Mass, but private Masses, which, by the Rubric
at the end of the Communion Office, the Church of England (as Mr.
Stuart reluctantly admits, " Thoughts on Low Masses," p. 46) has
expressly forbidden.
Turning from this to the explanation of the Article given in Tract xc,
and lately repeated by Mr. Medd and Mr. Stuart, by the former in some-
what different terms, according to which the Article was pointed at a
popular misapprehension as to the nature of the Sacrifice, I think that
the common prevalence of such an error, especially as it is described by
Mr. Medd, has been too hastily assumed without proof, which perhaps
it would be difficult to produce. But it is more important to observe
that Mr. Newman, when he had spoken of the Mass " being viewed as
independent of or distinct from the Sacrifice on the Cross," appears to
treat these two expressions, " independent of" and " distinct from," as
synonymous, and as conveying a meaning which he calls " blasphemy."
But there is a very wide difference between the two things. To view
the Mass as independent of the Sacrifice on the Cross, would indeed be
a very gross error ; but until I see some proof, I shall continue utterly
to disbelieve that it is one into which any worshipper at the Mass, even
in the darkest ages, ever fell. But though not independent of, it might
be viewed as distinct from, the Sacrifice on the Cross ; and so it is
viewed, not by the ignorant and vulgar only, but by the Church of Rome.
The distinction between the two things, which the language of Tract
xc. appears to confound with one another, may be illustrated by refe-
rence to another point of doctrine. Roman .Catholic Apologists defend
the use of direct prayer to the Virgin Mary, by the explanation that
APPENDIX.
197
nothing more is meant than the effect of her all-powerful intercession.
I may observe, by the way, that this assumption is altogether arbitrary,
and that it is not very easy to reconcile it with language such as I find
in a Sequence in the Arbuthnott Missal, p. 439.
" Supplicamus, nos emenda,
Emendatos nos commenda
Tuo Nato, ad habenda
Sempiteraa gaudia."
Hitherto, however, the Virgin Mary has not been elevated by any
formal definition above the rank of a creature. And so Mr. Oakeley
(" Leading Topics of Dr. Pusey's recent work ") can still say (p. 35),
" Every well-instructed Catholic (alas ! if they do not form the majority !)
knows that the Blessed Virgin possesses no power to grant petitions,
except such as she derives from God ; but he also knows that her influ-
ence with her Divine Son, in virtue of her maternal relation (!) and of
her transcendent sanctity, must needs be such, that her will to grant is
tantamount to the fact of granting, since her will is so entirely in harmony
with the will of God, that her petitions are all in the order of His Provi-
dence. If we knew that an earthly sovereign had an almoner, to whom
he had given the office of distributing his bounty, we should address
ourselves to that almoner as the source from which the bounty emanates,
though conscious all the while that he was merely the instrument of its
bestowal."
Such a view of the case no doubt excludes the notion that the Blessed
Virgin possesses any power of granting petitions independent of God.
But it as clearly invests her with a power " distinct from " His, and must
always tend to make her in practice the object of exclusive reliance and
supreme devotion. Even if the "almoner" is supposed to have no
discretion in the distribution of the Royal bounty ; the " influence of the
mother " is something perfectly distinct from the power of the Son.
And so the Sacrifice of the Mass might not the less practically supersede
that of the Cross, if conceived as " distinct from," though not
"independent of" this. And it is so conceived, not by the vulgar
only, but by the Church of Rome, speaking through her most accre-
dited doctors, and in her most sacred formularies. Let us hear the
prayer in the Mass which accompanies the offering of the bread : —
" Suscipe, Sancte Pater Omnipotens, aeterne Deus, hanc immaculatam
hostiam (strange language before the Consecration, but explained by
reference to that which the bread was to become), quam ego indignus
famulus tuus offero tibi Deo meo vivo et vero, pro innumerabilibus peccatis
et offensionibus et negligentiis meis, et pro omnibus circumstantibus ;
sed et pro omnibus fidelibus Christianis vivis atque defunctis, ut
mihi et illis proficiat ad salutem in vitam seternam." Our Reformers,
198
APPENDIX.
from their point of view, might well consider such an oblation as incon-
sistent with the oneness of that " finished upon the Cross ; " and as, like
the Invocation of the Virgin, on the one hand, a mere human invention,
the fruit of bold, unlicensed speculation and unbridled fancy, and, on the
other hand, the parent of manifold mischievous superstitions ; and loath-
ing it under both aspects alike might describe it in terms which we would
not willingly now use, while we fully adhere to the view which suggested
them, as a " blasphemous fable " and a " dangerous deceit."
This subject is so closely connected with that of Mr. Stuart's " Thoughts
on Low Masses," that I am induced to add a few remarks on the pro-
posal contained in that pamphlet. Mr. Stuart laments that at the
Reformation, the Low Masses, which had drawn crowds of worshippers
to our churches, on week-days as well as Sundays, were swept away,
and an order for daily Morning Prayer, which experience has proved to
be far less attractive, indeed to offer no attraction at all, substituted for
them. He has observed the crowds which attend the early Masses in
the Continental churches, and he thinks that ours might be as well filled
by an adaptation of our Liturgy to the like purpose. He would have it
curtailed, and the Rubrics, which say that there shall be no celebration
of the Sacrament unless there be a certain number of communicants,
removed, so that there may be nothing to prevent the congregation from
consisting, as in the Continental churches, of spectators only, who come
to join with the priest in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
Notwithstanding the title of the pamphlet, by which some may have
been alarmed and offended, it seems clear that, as to the positive doctrine
of the Thirty-first Article, Mr. Stuart's orthodoxy is irreproachable. He
takes great pains to explain that " there is but one real victim, which is
Christ, and but one real act of Sacrifice, which was finished upon the
Cross, and therefore to speak of Sacrifices, ' Sacrificia Missarum,' in the
plural number would be a blasphemous fable and a dangerous deceit "
(p. 38). He then proceeds to expound his theory of the Eucharistic
Sacrifice : "In the Eucharistic Sacrifice, or the Sacrifice of the Mass
(for they are but different names for the same thing), Christ is offered,
but not sacrificed — offered in memory of His death, not put to death
again. There is a real and propitiatory sacrifice, i. e. victim, in the
Eucharist, but there is no real act of propitiation ; the priest's offering
of Christ in the Eucharist is not an act of propitiation or atonement, but
only a memorial made before God of that propitiation and atonement
which was effected upon the Cross ; — by continually offering the very
victim Himself who was slain, we continually plead before God the
merits of His death " (p. 39). I must observe that however correct Mr.
Stuart may be in his view of what the Eucharistic Sacrifice should be,
to avoid direct collision with the Thirty-first Article, he is certainly mis-
taken if, when he says " there is a real and propitiatory sacrifice, i. e.
APPENDIX.
199
victim, in the Eucharist, but there is no real act of propitiation," he con-
ceives himself (as the whole context appears to show) to be expounding
and not directly contradicting the Roman doctrine of the Mass. For
when, in Canon I. De Sacrificio Missas, the Council of Trent declares,
" Si quis dixerit in Missa non offerri Deo verum et proprium sacrificium,
aut quod offerri non sit aliud quam nobis Christum ad manducandum
dari : anathema sit," it is certain that sacrificium does not mean the
victim, but the act — the same act which in Canon III. is declared to be
an " act of propitiation." " Si quis dixerit, Missa? Sacrificium tantum
esse laudis et gratiarum actionis, aut nudam commemorationem sacriticii
in Cruce peracti (only a memorial) non autem propitiatorium, anathema
sit." Can Mr. Stuart have a right to say that the Eucharistic Sacrifice
and the Sacrifice of the Mass " are but different names for the same
thing," when there is such a radical disagreement between his descrip-
tion of the one and the Council's description of the other ? But putting
the Mass out of the question and confining myself to Mr. Stuart's view
of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, I must observe that it is open to one capital
objection. It is indeed only the One Sacrifice which is to be pleaded,
but it is to be pleaded in a special manner : namely, by the offering of the
consecrated Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper. And tho question is
— first, whether such a mode of pleading does not require the sanction
of a Divine appointment, and, if it was a mere human invention, would
not be presumptuous and profane — the more so for being engrafted on
Christ's most solemn ordinance — and next, whether any such sanction is
to be found in the records of the original institution unless what has been
imported into them by most violent and arbitrary interpretation. Mr.
Stuart would probably answer the first part of this question in the affir-
mative. But as to the other, he may be one of those who are easily satisfied
with proofs of that which it seems to them desirable to have proved, and
he may be content to interpret the words, " Do this in remembrance of
me," as at once the institution of a Sacrifice and the ordination of the
Apostles to the Sacerdotal Office. He has the fullest right to this opinion
if he is able to hold it. Only he should not assume that it is commonly
received among Churchmen and scholars, on whom it has not been
forced by the anathema of an infallible Council. Even, however, if it
were allowable to waive this grave objection to the theory in considera-
tion of the general desirableness of the object, as to which I give Mr.
Stuart full credit for the very best intentions, there would remain another
which seems to me very serious, with regard to practice. Before he
could reasonably expect that worshippers will be attracted to his Low
Masses, as in the churches of France or Belgium, two things appear to
be needed, neither of which can be admitted to be clearly practicable or
desirable. One is, that the English congregation should come with the
same notions of the nature and efficacy of the Eucharistic Sacrifice which
200
APPENDIX.
Roman Catholics bring to the Mass. The other is, that the Anglican
Office should be adapted to these notions. Otherwise, even if all Mr.
Stuart's suggestions were carried into effect by the abridgment of the
Liturgy aud the omission of the " obstructive " rubrics, the result would
be a most unsatisfactory state of things. The congregation would bo
thinking of one thing, the minister would be speaking to them of another.
They come to be spectators of a Sacrifice, he tells them of nothing but a
Communion, of which he invites them to partake, though he neither
expects nor seriously desires that any of them should do so. So far
would it be from an advantage to " those who are near to the altar "
(p. 49), to " hear the words themselves which accompany that offering "
(an offering which is not expressed by a single word in the service) that
the best thing possible for all present would be that the whole should
pass off — as is indeed so very nearly the case in most Low Masses — in
perfectly dumb show, so that the people, with the aid of appropriate
manuals of devotion, might follow their train of thought, the priest his form
of words, in parallel lines, without connexion or convergency indeed, but
also without conflict or disturbance.
Apart from all theological objections, I cannot think this a happy plan,
though I fully admit the want which it is intended to supply, and that
our Order of Morning Prayer is not in its present state adapted to the
purpose of an early service which common people, even of devout habits,
could be expected to attend. It labours under the twofold disadvantage
of inconvenient length, especially in the Lessons and Psalms, and of
monotony in the recitation. Its failure does not prove that a shorter
service, interspersed with melody, might not succeed, at least as well as
Mr. Stuart's experiment, and might not be at least as easily introduced.
(D.)
A few passages in the Consultation of Archbishop Herman of Cologne
may be read with interest, as bearing on some of the questions discussed
in the Charge. I extract them from the English translation of 1548, but
have modernized the spelling.
" Before all things the pastors must labour to take out of men's minds
that false and wicked opinion whereby men think commonly that the
priest in masses offereth up Christ our Lord to God the Father, after that
sort, that with his intention and prayer he causeth Christ to become a
new and acceptable sacrifice to the Father for the salvation of men,
applieth and communicateth the merit of the passion of Christ and of the
APPENDIX.
201
saving sacrifice, whereby the Lord Himself offered Himself to the Father,
a sacrifice on the Cross, to them that receive the same with their own
faith."
" For to make men partakers in the Supper of the Lord of the sacrifice
and merits of our Lord Jesus Christ, the minister can help no more than
that first he exhibit and minister the Holy Supper, as the Lord instituted,
and then faithfully declare and celebrate religiously the mystery of it ;
namely, the redemption and cominution (sic) of our Lord Jesus Christ,
and furthermore dispense the sacraments (the Bread and Wine) whereby
he may stir up and confirm in them that be present true faith in Christ,
by which faith every man may himself apprehend and receive the merit
and sacrifice of Christ as given unto him."
" But it is plain that men are everywhere in this error, that they
believe if they be present when the priest sayeth mass and take part of
the mass only with their presence, that this very work and sacrifice of
the priest, whereby he offereth the Son to the Father for their sins, that
is to say, setteth Him before the Father with his intention and prayer, is
of such efficacy that it turneth all evil from them and bringeth them all
felicity of body and soul, though they continue in all manner of sins
against God and then- conscience, and neither perceive nor receive the
sacraments out of the mass, but only behold the outward action as a
spectacle, and honour it with bowing of knees and other gestures and
signs of veneration."
" And whereas the holy fathers call the ministration of this sacrament
a sacrifice and oblation, and write sometimes that the priest in the admin-
istering the Supper offereth Christ, let the preachers know and teach
other, when need shall be, that the holy fathers by the name of a sacri-
fice understood not application, which was devised a great while after
the fathers, and prevailed with other abuses, but a solemn remembrance
of the sacrifice of Christ, as Augustine expoundcth it. For while the
Supper of the Lord is administered as the Lord instituted it, the sacrifice
of Christ is celebrated and exhibited therein through the preaching of His
death and distribution of the sacraments, that all they which rightly use
the Holy Supper may receive the fruit of this sacrifice."
" As the pastors must diligently teach and dissuade them which with
the rest of the congregation cannot communicate because they stick in
open sins, that they be not present at the Holy Supper, and testify unto
them that if they stand at the Supper with such a mind they do spite
unto Christ, and that it shall be damnation unto them. So they must
also diligently warn and exhort them which with a good conscience be
present at the Supper, that is to say which truly believe in Christ the
Lord, that they receive the sacraments with other members of Christ."
" But forasmuch as this institution of the Lord that all they which be
present at the same Supper of the Lord should communicate of one
202
APPENDIX.
bread and cup, His Body and Blood, is too much out of use, and covered
a great while since through common ignorance, it shall be needful to call
men back again treatably and gently to the observation of this tradition
of the Lord, and the preachers must beware that the minds of the simple,
which nevertheless be the true disciples of the Lord, and are entangled
in no mischievous and wicked acts, for the which they should be
restrained from the Lord's Board, be not stricken and troubled with sore
rebukes or untimely thrusting unto the receiving of the sacrament. For
there be not a few which, though they cannot thoroughly understand
this mystery and the perfect use of sacraments, yet have such faith in
Christ, that they can pray with the congregation and be somewhat edified
in faith through holy doctrine and exhortations that be wont to be used
about the Holy Supper and the ministration thereof, yea and they may
be taught and moved by little and little to a perfecter knowledge of this
mystery, and an oftener use of the sacraments, even by this that they
be present at the Holy Supper, which abstain not from the Lord's Supper
of any contempt of the sacraments which they acknowledge in themselves,
but of a certain weakness of men and preposterous reverence of the
sacrament."
It will be seen that the first paragraph in these extracts speaks of " a
false opinion "as to what is done by the priest in masses, and therefore
according to the principle of interpretation which has been applied to our
Thirty-first Article, might be thought not to be directed against the mass
itself. But in the margin we read, "The false opinion concerning the
oblation of the priest in the mass must be taken away." And the state-
ments which follow leave no doubt as to the Archbishop's meaning.
The work appears to have been a joint production of Bucer, Melancthon,
and other Beforrners (Gieseler, Lehrbuch der K. G. 111. 1. p. 322).
Luther, as appears from a letter in De Wette's Collection, v. p. 708, was
dissatisfied with the chapter on the Lord's Supper, as not sufficiently
explicit with regard to the " substance." And Gieseler observes that it
passes over the real presence of the Body. Yet the pastors are enjoined
to " warn the people that they doubt nothing but the Lord Himself is
present in the midst of them, and giveth them His very Body and Blood,
that they ever may more fully live in Him, and He in them."
X.
A CHARGE
Delivered October and November, 1869.
DISESTABLISHMENT OF THE IRISH CHURCH. RITUALISM. THE
EUCHAR1STIC CONTROVERSY. THE VATICAN COUNCIL.
My Reverend Brethren,
If it had been customary to prefix a text of Scripture to a
Visitation Charge, that which would most readily have occurred
to me, as appropriate to the circumstances in which we now meet,
would have been the words of the Psalmist : " If the foundations
be destroyed, what can the righteous (the righteous man) do ? " *
Not, thank God, that the period in which we are living is one of
revolutionary convulsion, in which the institutions on which social
order reposes have been violently upturned. But it may be said,
without exaggeration, that it is one in which change follows
change with unexampled rapidity, each apparently fraught with
more and more momentous consequences, reaching down to
fundamental principles of thought, belief, and action, laying them
bare to the most searching investigation, and threatening what-
ever they are found too weak to sustain, however hallowed and
endeared by traditional associations, with collapse or overthrow.
It is therefore a time for the question, " If the foundations be
destroyed, what can the righteous man do ? " or, what ought he
to do? What is the frame of mind and the course of action
which befits one who desires to live as in the Divine presence, and
to shape his conduct by the rule of duty toward God and his
neighbour ?
• rs. xi. 3.
204
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
Such a one will surely not forget, but rather will be led to bear
The course in mind more earnestly than ever, that the changes
guided by which 6tartle us by their apparent suddenness, are
God's
Providence, indeed but the outcome of a long, silent, and unseen
preparation, working through a variety of unsuspected agencies
toward an inevitable result. One advantage of this view is, that
it lifts the mind out of the turbid atmosphere of personal prejudice
and passion, as it shows how little individuals or parties really
have to do with either the good or the evil of which they are the
instruments. It lifts the mind, I say, out of this unwholesome
atmosphere into a region of serene contemplation, in which it may
find calmness, consolation, and assurance. For we firmly believe
that the course of events is guided, not by a blind chance or a
mechanical necessity, but by the mind and will of a wise and
Fatherly Providence, Whose designs are never fully known to
man, are often wrapt in utter darkness, or present an aspect
which we are unable to reconcile with supreme wisdom and
goodness ; but which will, we doubt not, be fully justified by the
final issue, and which even now become more and more discernible
as we extend our survey over a larger field of history, and observe
the working of the Divine Government on a greater scale, so as in
some measure to see how abiding and general good is evolved out
of apparent partial and temporary evil.
Such a habit of thought will best secure the peace of our souls
when the foundations seem to rock under our feet. But for the
Aim of the righteous man peace and comfort are not the only or the
righteous, higher aim. He would not consent, even if it was in
his power, to remain an inactive and unconcerned spectator of
events which deeply affect the weal or woe of his fellow-men.
And the Psalmist's question is not, how may he be free from
care and trouble, how may he enjoy uninterrupted ease and quiet ?
The time of ^u^' on contrary, "What can he do?" And this
^for must mean, not for himself only, but for others. The
peculiar character of an extraordinary time is not only
a trial of faith, but a call to action, for every one, according to his
sphere and capacity. It is true, opportunities of action, which can,
CHARGES.
205
in any sensible degree, affect the course of events, must be very
rare and confined to a few. But the conduct of all is swayed by
their opinions and beliefs, and may exercise a powerful influence
on others. And thus the formation of a right judgment may
become an important part of practical duty. Such a judgment is
indeed a gift, for which the Church teaches us to pray, as not to
be obtained without the operation of the Holy Spirit ; and this
implies that it will not be vouchsafed to minds clouded by wilful
prejudice, or selfish aims, or evil passions. But neither is it to be
looked for in such as remain in a state of sluggish passiveness ;
which shrink from the labour of obeying the Apostolic precept :
" Prove all things : hold fast that which is good ; " which are
content with simply echoing the dictates of some human authority,
are too careless about truth to take the trouble of thinking for
themselves, and of making the opinion, on which nevertheless they
do not scruple to act on very important occasions, a personal con-
viction of their own breasts. But in persons who have dedicated
themselves to the office of spiritual Teachers and Guides, such
inertness and indifference, manifesting itself in a thoughtless
repetition of the utterances of other minds, amounts to nothing
less than an abdication of their most sacred function, at the very
season when its exercise is most urgently required.
And no one may claim exemption from this duty on the plea
that as a minister of religion he ought, or is at liberty, Ministers
to keep aloof from political contention. That would be not exempt
from this
perfectly true, if it is meant to apply to contests which duty-
concern only personal or temporary interests. But it would be a
lamentable error if it was extended to questions which involve the
welfare of the State. Undoubtedly the Church of Christ has the
first claim on our affections and our energies. But they would be
misplaced and misdirected, if we were to regard the State as a
region foreign to our sympathies ; one in which we have no
proper home, to which we are bound by no tie but such as springs
out of the wants of our lower nature, and which therefore, in
proportion as we are devoted to the work of our sacred calling,
ought to occupy a narrower and lower place in our thoughts.
206
BISHOP THIELWALL'S
This is indeed, if we trace it to its root, an upgrowth of the old
Manichoean error, which leavened the early Church, and was
never entirely purged out ; which wasted so many lives in a
selfish barren asceticism ; treating the body as essentially unholy
because the creature of a Being opposed to the Father of Spirits,
and as incapable of administering to the good of the soul, other-
wise than by its own suffering and degradation. Such a view,
though once extensively prevalent, now shocks us as a wild and
monstrous delusion. But it is closely akin to that which regards
the State as simply secular and profane, as a necessity to which
we reluctantly submit, while we strive as much as possible to
avoid all active contact with it. It was of a Pagan and a perse-
cuting State that the Apostle declared, " The powers that be are
ordained of God." This would suffice to show that the end of the
State, or civil society, in itself is holy and just and good, though
it is only through the Church that this end is ever fully attained,
or rather the nearest practicable approach made towards the
attainment of it.
Relations ^e <luesti0118 which arise out of the relations between
chmXand Church and State, are among the most difficult with
which the human mind has to deal. And the difficulty
is greatly increased by the imperfection and ambiguity of
language ; which so easily leads us to forget that Church and
State are both abstract terms ; that the concrete reality which
underlies each, is an aggregate of persons knit together by an
ideal bond ; that in the happiest state of things, that in which
each best fulfils the purpose of its institution, the very same
persons who, in one view, constitute the State, in another view,
constitute the Church ; and that, as the head is not the body, so
the ruler, or governing power, is not the State, but the repre-
sentative and organ of its mind and will ; and the Clergy, or
ministering agency, is not the Church. These questions are
forced upon us with peculiar urgency by the events of our own
day ; and it is on them above all that it behoves us to endeavour
to stay our minds on clear notions and solid principles.
You are all aware of the subject — long uppermost in the
CHARGES.
207
thoughts of all of us — which has suggested these reflections.
Even if I had no special reasons for desiring to draw your
attention to this subject, its intrinsic importance would have
entitled it to the foremost place in this address. It is true it has
been the occasion of an excitement often quite alien to the tone of
feeling befitting the place in which we are now assembled. But
this appears to me a reason, not for avoiding the subject, but on
the contrary for dwelling upon it in a different spirit, and
weighing it, not in the scales of selfish interests and party
passions, but, as far as we can, in the balance of the Sanctuary.
Here, as usual, it is only by the light of the past that Retrospect
we can hope to gain any clear view of the present, or ^story-
any true insight into the future. The retrospect is indeed one of
the most saddening to be found in the annals of history ; but we
may not shrink from pondering its lessons and its warnings. It
presents a Land abounding in the sources of national wealth, in
all that can stimulate and reward industry, and by its natural
features exercising a peculiar charm on the affections of its
inhabitants ; a People richly gifted with many noble qualities of
mind and heart ; singularly deficient indeed in the faculty and
the spirit of political and ecclesiastical organization, neither
comprehending its conditions, nor appreciating its advantages,
but naturally disposed to yield to the guidance of a friendly and
beneficent authority, and for many centuries closely connected
with a more powerful nation, endowed in an eminent degree with
the qualities which the weaker most lacked. Here, then, it
might have been thought, were the elements of prosperity and
happiness for both. And yet in the whole course of Irish history
there is not one bright spot ; not a single period on which
memory can dwell without finding matter chiefly for shame,
sorrow, and regret. I cannot even except that to which many
look back as to a golden age, the time when Ireland won the
name of the Isle of Saints. That description does not prove it to
have been a land of holiness. The seventh century, an age in
which the Church was sunk in the grossest darkness and
corruption, was called the Age of Saints ; and we cannot doubt
208
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
that, while the Irish monasteries were seats of piety and learning,
and sent forth many illustrious missionaries to spread the Gospel
in foreign lands, their own country was in the same state of
anarchy and barbarism in which we find it as soon as we become
acquainted with its internal condition.
I am not going to relate its history ; but there are in that history
some prominent epochs to which I must invite your attention, because
they have a most important bearing on the subject now before us.
union with The most momentous epoch in the history of both
howeffected. countries was that which first yoked them together
under a common rule. This event, big with such a vast train of
consequences, was ominously marked with the character of
unprovoked aggression and violent conquest. It is true this
wrong was sanctioned by the Papal oracle, then generally
acknowledged throughout "Western Christendom as supreme in
all questions of faith and morals, in perfect accordance with the
ancient maxims of the See of Rome, always ready — as in the
cases of Phocas, of Clovis, and of Pepin — to countenance any
injustice which tended to promote its own aggrandizement. And
if the end could have sanctified the means, the invasion might
have been justified by the prospect of the advantages which might
have been expected to ensue from the comprehension of the two
islands under one sceptre. But the effect was only to divide the
less powerful into two hostile camps, and to make it a theatre of
incessant, wasting, and demoralising warfare. The policy of the
English Government was one of physical force, rendered the more
insupportable to the native population by the studied display of
hatred and contempt on the part of the conquerors. It may be
said that this was the policy of a rude, wild, lawless age. But
its effect was not the less irritating, and did not the less call for
reparation and atonement which were never made. The influence
of the Roman Catholic religion did not restrain the most
outrageous excesses of this unchristian spirit. The power of the
Pope, who claimed to be sovereign lord, was uniformly exerted
on the side of the strongest. The victims of English tyranny
appealed to him in vain.
CHARGES.
209
But the stroke of retribution fell whsn England received the
greatest of all blessings, that to which she owes her place among
the nations. It then appeared that she had deprived
herself of the power of imparting this blessing to the
people whom she had treated as a race of abject serfs, below
the level, and outside the pale of humanity, who might be killed
with impunity, and without remorse, as beasts of the field.* She
had associated it in their minds with the idea of violence and
oppression, of insolence and cruelty. She made it the object of
their bitterest hatred. She united them in the closest alliance
with the Continental Powers who were leagued together for the
destruction of the Reformed faith, especially in this land. So the
breach was widened by that which should have healed it. The
animosity of race was envenomed by religious rancour, and the
influence of a purer creed failed to inspire the dominant nation
with milder sentiments towards its subjects. It would indeed be
unfair to overlook the provocations which roused its resentment,
and the peril which compelled it to resort to rigorous measures
in self-defence. But neither may we forget that this necessity
was the effect of centuries of misrule. And if it be admitted
that the penal legislation was excusable in the heat of a great
crisis, can this plea avail for the tenacious maintenance of that
atrocious code, when it could serve no purpose but that of
nourishing the evil passions of those who regarded the affliction
and degradation of their countrymen as the only sound basis of
Protestant ascendancy ?
It was not until a very late period that better thoughts, if not
more humane and Christian sentiments, began to stir in improve-
the minds of English statesmen, roused indeed it is to be English ad-
ministra-
feared by a sense of the folly rather than of the wickedness tion-
of the system by which the country had been so long misgoverned,
to the detriment alike of the sufferer and the oppressor. This
apathy with regard to the first principles of justice and humanity
admits indeed of one most unhappy palliation. Even in those
whose sacred calling should have quickened their perceptions of
* Wordsworth's "History of the Church of Ireland," p. 152.
VOL. II. P
210
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
right and wrong, we not only miss any protest against the iniquity
of the penal legislation, any attempt to assume the part of media-
tors and intercessors, but we find the most strenuous resistance to
every proposal made to mitigate its rigour. It may be said that
the clergy could not reasonably be expected to be in advance of
their age ; that it was natural their attention and sympathy
should be absorbed by the interests of their own Church. That
may be true, and certainly none would have been selected for high
office in the Church who were suspected of any sympathy with
Irish wrongs. But we have here nothing to do with the allot-
ment of individual responsibility, but only with the impression
left on the mind of the people. The introduction of the Reforma-
tion into Ireland was an object in which the power and safety of
the kingdom was deeply concerned, and all the authority of the
State was exerted to bring it about. But when it appeared that
the only benefit to be derived from it was the spiritual welfare of
the Roman Catholic population, it ceased to occupy the thoughts
either of statesmen or of Churchmen, and a proselytizing move-
ment would have been viewed in high quarters with displeasure.
The union Finally, the union of the two countries, indispensably
effected J . .
against the necessary as it was for the security of the British
majority. Empire, was notoriously brought about against the will
of the great majority of the Irish people, by means morally
indefensible, and alike discreditable to both parties, the bribers
and the bribed.* It might, nevertheless, have opened a new
era of peace and concord, if it had been accompanied by the
measures which entered into the original design of its author,
followed up by others conceived in the same spirit of conciliation.
But as, unhappily, this was prevented by causes too well known to
need mention, it not only contributed nothing to cement a real
union of minds and hearts, but rather embittered the previous
animosity of those who saw their national existence merged in that
of a foreign power, and their country, according to the Roman
phrase, reduced into the form of a province, without any compen-
sation to console them for the loss of an, at least nominal and
* See note C, in the Appendix.
CHARGES.
211
formal, independence. The Union had all the legal force of an Act
of Parliament, and even of a solemn treaty. But morally it was
a mere name, a fiction, a piece of parchment, utterly inoperative
for its professed purpose. It neither expressed a fact, nor tended
to realize the supposition which it assumed. The cry for its repeal
never ceased to awaken an echo in the Irish bosom ; and the most
important boons lost all their conciliatory value, because they
appeared to be not free offerings of our good- will or of our justice,
but concessions wrung from our fears.
So the great problem has been handed down to us, still awaiting
a solution, which has become more and more necessary, but more
and more difficult. The only cheering and hopeful sign Reversal of
ji n i n • • i England'8
is that now, for the first time in the course of that old policy,
doleful history which we have been reviewing, it has been taken
up with a sincere desire and firm intention to redress every real
wrong, and remove every reasonable ground of complaint. Let it
not be supposed that, when I say this, I am thinking of individuals
or of parties. That which appears to me hopeful in the present
aspect of things, is entirely independent of all particular views and
feelings. It is that the general voice of the country has declared
its resolution to reverse the old blind and iniquitous policy, to
abolish the anomalies and wrongs to which it gave birth ; and, if
possible, to establish a rule of righteousness and peace.
But the difficulty of carrying this intention into effect is greatly
increased by the variety of objects which demand attention and
contend for precedence. "Whether that which has been selected
as the first subject of legislation might have been safely Irish Church
-, , EstabliHh-
and advantageously postponed, is a question which, from meut-
the moment that the selection was actually made, ceased to be of
any practical importance, and is totally unfit for discussion in this
place. But undoubtedly, if there was in the Irish Church
Establishment no offensive anomaly which required correction, no
sensible grievance which called for redress, no palpable contrast
between that which had been imposed upon Ireland, and that
which, if it had been an independent nation, Ireland would have
chosen for itself, then it must be admitted that the abolition of the
p 2
212
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
Irish Establishment was a wanton innovation, for which hardly
any of the terms of reprobation which have been applied to it
were too strong. But it is on that supposition that they have
been applied to it. They have assumed that this view of the case
is so evidently the right one, as not to admit of any candid doubt ;
and yet nothing is more certain as a matter of fact, than that,
whether rightly or wrongly, the opposite opinion has been very
generally held, both at home and abroad ; and in particular that
among intelligent foreigners, even the most friendly, and the
warmest admirers of our institutions, the Irish Church Establish-
ment has been universally regarded as the most glaring of all
anomalies, the grossest of all abuses, that which, above all others,
tests the sincerity of those who profess to aim at a just policy in
opinion of the government of Ireland. It has been said that the
on ' Ttfabou- opinion of foreigners on our domestic concerns is entitled
to no weight. That is not quite in accordance with a
familiar proverb on the advantage of a bystander's position. But
however worthless such an opinion may be in itself, it seems hard
to believe that what to strangers appears an intolerable wrong,
should be viewed in a totally different light by those who are sub-
ject to it, even when they assure us of the contrary ; and it would
seem as if the prevalence of the opinion, whether well founded
or not, must itself tend to engender and nourish the feeling.
The religious theory of the Irish Church Establishment rests
Theory of uP°n the assumption, that it is a right and a duty of a
Establish- Christian State to exert all its power and influence for
the maintenance and propagation of true religion. This,
of course, involves the farther assumption that the State, as repre-
sented by its rulers, is capable of ascertaining which is the true
religion, and this not only as between Christians and adherents of
other creeds, but as between various forms of Christian faith. As
long however as the society, in its religious aspect, is homogeneous,
this question will not arise, unless as matter of otiose speculation
for thinkers in their closets. But the case is manifestly changed,
when the unity of Christian belief has been broken up into a
number of conflicting sects. The application of the general
CHARGES.
213
principle to such a state of things is beset with very grave diffi-
culties, both of theory and practice. If we attempt to vindicate
the Irish Church Establishment on the ground of that principle,
it seems as if our argument must take some such form as this : —
" Three centuries ago we renounced the old errors to _
o 'I he arg*u-
which you still blindly cling. We offered you the pure mentBtated-
doctrine of our Reformed Church. It was your fault if you
rejected it with abhorrence. But we do not force you to profess
what you do not believe. We even permit you openly to cele-
brate the rites of your religion, much as they shock our feelings,
and to support its ministers, strongly as we dislike them. It is
true we reserve all the provision made for religious instruction,
and all the privileges and distinctions annexed to the pastoral
office, to the clergy of a small minority, whom you regard as
teachers of deadly heresy. But if from your point of view this
appears to you unjust, because you think that a large portion, at
least, of the funds so employed rightfully belongs to you, and
because you consider your own clergy as, at least, equally entitled
to public acknowledgment, you must remember that, by virtue of
the Union — which, though it was forced upon you by the right of
the strongest, is still legally valid — you were fused into one nation
with us : and thus, what had been a minority became a majority,
entitled to all the advantage of superior members."
Whether this is in itself sound reasoning or not, I think that,
if we place ourselves for a moment in the position of its tendency
an Irish Roman Catholic, and imagine his feelings, we enrerpuj?h
nance to the
should see that the effect on his mind could be only to Union,
strengthen his repugnance to the Union, and to inflame his
hatred of those who use it for such a purpose. For the argument
implies a claim to a kind of superiority, which is just the last that
men can be brought to admit. It assumes that those whom we so
address have no right to judge for themselves in matters which lie
between God and their conscience. We know to what Church
these maxims and pretensions properly belong. They spring
naturally out of the doctrine of infallibility. But they are out of
placo in a Church which exists only by the right of protest against
214
BISHOP THIRLW ALL'S
a usurped authority ; one in which conscience is supreme, and
cannot suffer its decisions to be overruled by any judgment which
it does not freely adopt as its own.
„ Religious Establishments have been both defended
No express °
I™lpturem and impugned by good and pious men, who have natu-
Ertabiish- rally been anxious to claim the authority of Scripture in
favour of their views. But when we find the same texts
adduced in support of contradictory propositions,* we are forced to
despair of obtaining any direct Scriptural guidance in the contro-
versy, and to resign ourselves to the conviction, that the utmost
we can expect to find is some broad general statement of principles
which we are left to apply by the light of our own reason and
conscience. And it is observable that those who maintain the
duty of providing for a public profession of religion to be incum-
bent on the Christian magistrate, commonly build their theory on
the hypothesis of an ideal ruler in an ideal State : a ruler invested
with absolute power, and governing a people united by the same
religious profession. In such a case it is not difficult to show that
it is the duty of the ruler to exert his power for the protection of
the interests of that religion which he and his subjects profess.
Despotic It is on this account that the Church of Rome has always
livomedhy favoured despotic forms of government when adminis-
the Church r °
of Rome. tered by adherents of her own faith. The sovereigns
who, like Philip II. and Louis XIV., wielded their absolute power
for the extirpation of heresy, realized her ideal of the perfect
State, t And this, I think, may serve to allay any regret which
we might otherwise feel, when we reflect that such a state of
* As John xviii. 36, by Archbishop Whately (" The Kingdom of Christ,"
Essay i. § 9) on the one hand, and by Mr. Birks ("Church and State," chap, iii.) on
the other.
t " The modern civil constitutions, and the efforts for self-government, and the
limitation of arbitrary royal power, are in the strongest contradiction to Ultra-
montanism, the very kernel and ruling principle of which is the consolidation of
absolutism in the Church. But State and Church are intimately connected : they
act and react on one another, and it is inevitable that the political views and
tendencies of a nation should sooner or later influence it in Church matters also.
Hence the profound hatred, at the bottom of the soul of every genuine Ultra-
montane, of free institutions and the whole constitutional system." — " The Pope
and the Council," by Janus, p. 21. An excellent translation of a most valuable
work.
CHARGES.
215
tilings is visibly and rapidly passing away ; that it only lingers
in the imperfectly civilized parts of Europe, while in those which
represent its highest intelligence and culture it belongs to the
irrevocable past. Both as men and as Christians, we have reason
to rejoice in this change. But it has evidently intro- Its decline
duced new conditions into the question of Church catedthe
question of
Establishments, which render it much more complicated
and difficult, and deprive much of the reasoning which ments-
was grounded on that imaginary basis of all force and relevancy .
And it may be safely said that there is no country in the world
where the difficulty is so great, the problem so complicated, as it
is in our own : the seat of a vast empire, extended over a great
variety of races and religions, and itself inhabited by a population
divided by endless diversities of opinion and belief, and subject to
a monarchy so tempered by constitutional restraints, that no small
sagacity is required to determine where the centre of power is to
be found, and it is only certain that it depends on the concurrence
of many subordinate agencies. It is clear that rules of action
which under a system of personal government might be binding
on the conscience of the ruler, would become utterly inapplicable
to a Legislative Body, representing widely divergent religious
sentiments, and of masses too large and powerful to be ignored or
neglected. The practical neutrality or impartiality which in the
one case would have been a fault or a sin, becomes, under altered
circumstances, a necessity and an obligation. The zeal which was
a duty, becomes an error and a weakness.
And here I would interpose a more general reflection. That many
good and thinking men should be distressed and alarmed by the
changes which are passing on the condition of society, Eefleotions
and which make it impossible for the State to maintain
the profession of a national religion in the same sense as Society-
while the Church and the nation were numerically identical ; that
they should regard with anxious forebodings the preponderance
recently acquired by the democratical element in the Constitution ;
— this is a feeling which we can well understand, and with which
we must all sympathize. But I must return once more to the.
216
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
Psalmist's question ; and remind you that it is not, " How will
the righteous man feel ? " but " What can he do ? " and the first
thing, as it seems to me, which he has to do, and which is quite in
his power, is to satisfy himself whether this change is a mere
momentary fluctuation, which may be expected soon to subside, or
is a mighty stream of tendency, which no human power can arrest
or control. If it is unmistakably marked with the character of a
natural, social development, then, however much we may see in it
to deplore and to dread, still, as believers in a superintending
Providence, we cannot look upon it as merely evil ; and instead of
mourning over it, and keeping aloof from it in a gloomy passive-
ness, or wasting our strength in a vain attempt to stem the tide
which is carrying all before it upon earth, and can only be over-
ruled by Him Who " sitteth above the waterflood," we shall hold
it our duty to deal with it in a loving and hopeful spirit, to recog-
nize all that is good or capable of good in it ; and, approaching it
in such a spirit, we shall probably find much more than we looked
for ; and to apply all our diligence to mitigate the evil, and to
foster the good.
State coun- The adversaries of religious Establishments often
religious appeal to the historv of the Church in the first three
Establish- .
ments. Centuries, as a proof that Christianity flourished most
when it was not only unestablished, but persecuted by the State,
and that its alliance with the Empire was attended by a sensible
decline in its purity and fervour. They are met by the reply, that
religion did not, and could not, fully manifest its power of leaven-
ing the whole mass of society, and of hallowing all social relations,
until it had entered into union with the State, and that its corrup-
tion was owing to causes independent of that union, which in itself
was highly beneficial. It may, however, be imagined as a possible
case, that, after the conversion of Constantine, the countenance of
the State might have been withdrawn from Paganism, but not
transferred to Christianity, and that the Christian faith might not
have been publicly recognized by any official authority. Its
influence on all classes would have continued the same ; only the
Law would have remained neutral, and would not have dispensed
CHARGES. 217
either rewards or punishments in its favour. But when we consider
how utterly foreign such motives are to religion, it seems difficult
to contend that it would have suffered any loss from their absence.
Rather we may clearly trace some of the worst evils which
afflicted the Church to the Imperial patronage. The head of a
family, the citizen, the magistrate, may also be a member of a
religious society, and if he is earnest and sincere, his conduct in
his private and civil capacity will be shaped by his religious con-
victions ; but the two characters are not the less distinct from one
another. And so the Christian State may regidate its acts by
Christian principles, though it is wholly severed from the Church.
The State does not necessarily become heathen or infidel, because
it confines itself to its own sphere, and does not intermeddle with
that of the Church. And it seems hardly to be questioned that
the reign of Christ upon earth was more fully, more heartily, and
more practically recognized by the primitive Church, in her
poverty, her weakness, her political nullity, than in the subse-
quent period, when kings became her nursing fathers, and their
queens her nursing mothers, shielding her indeed from outward
violence, but often injuring her by mistaken kindness.
The conclusion which seems to me to follow from these premisses,
is one, I am aware, alike unacceptable to both parties : J^^811"
to that which condemns religious Establishments as un- absolutely
lawful, because injurious to the sovereignty of Christ, and §aad nor
to that which holds them to be essential to the full assertion of that
sovereignty. I regard both these extremes of opinion as untenable.
The very fact of their conflict, and that they are espoused by
persons equally entitled to respect, appears to me a sure indication
that the truth lies somewhere between them, that neither is the
one constitution forbidden, nor the other prescribed by any Divine
authority ; that neither is absolutely good or bad ; that it must
always depend on the circumstances of each case which is prefer-
able to the other ; and that the decision must ultimately rest with
the supreme power in every State, not as exempt from error, but
because there is under heaven no other of higher jurisdiction, or
of fuller competency ; none that possesses any better right to
218
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
decree, or any clearer light to guide its judgment. This is, of
course, only a Protestant view of the question. But those who
insist on the necessity of choosing between the two extremes, are
really, though unconsciously, taking ground which can be consis-
tently maintained only by those who acknowledge an infallible
earthly oracle, which is empowered to speak in the name of
Christ, and entitled to claim implicit submission to its responses.
If, however, the State is, and in a Protestant com-
fey** \°a munity must be, at liberty to exercise its discretion on
With the the question of contracting an alliance with the Church,
it seems to follow that it may exercise the same discre-
tion on the question of dissolving an alliance contracted in time past ;
as no one doubts that the Church may sever the ties which connect
it with the State, if they seem inconsistent with the end of its
institution. But though in the abstract the one liberty may seem
to carry the other, there is an immense difference between the
two things, in the difficulty, the danger, and the responsibility
incurred. It is as the difference between the omitting to
plant a tree, and the uprooting of one which has weathered the
storms of centuries, and has afforded shelter and nourishment to
many generations. And this image does but very imperfectly
illustrate the magnitude and peril of such an undertaking.
For the soil in which a long established Church has struck its
roots, is no other than that of man's higher nature, the seat of
his loftiest aspirations, his deepest cravings, his holiest affections ;
all liable to suffer grievous hurt in their most delicate fibres from
the operation. And this is no doubt a motive for entering upon
it, if it is believed to be necessary, with the utmost caution, and
for conducting it with the greatest possible tenderness. But it is
another question, whether we can say that it is in itself absolutely
unjustifiable, and a breach of the Divine Law. And here I think
it is not irrelevant to recollect the testimony of one who lately
passed from us amidst the highest tributes of affectionate venera-
tion from the Church which he had adorned by his life as well as
by his writings, — the Author of the " Christian Year." It was on
the disestablishment of the Irish Church that he expressed his
CHARGES.
219
opinion by the question, "Is it not just ?"* Whether we consider
his scrupulous conscientiousness, his piety, or his ecclesiastical
prepossessions, it does not seem to be laying undue weight on his
authority, to say that it is not inferior to that of any who have
condemned the measure as a repudiation of Christianity.
But the question becomes much more complicated and difficult,
when the separation is accompanied by the alienation Alienation
of property which the Church had enjoyed during the property,
union, either as a gift of the State or under the sanction of its
laws, giving to the will of private donors a validity which of itself
it could not have claimed. By some every such alienation is
regarded as sacrilegious, on the ground that whatever has been so
dedicated to a sacred use has become " the property of God." To
you, my Reverend Brethren, I need only remark in a single word
that whenever we speak of the sacredness of any material offering
made to the Most High, it must always be with the reservation —
tacit, if not express — of the fundamental truth, that such an offer-
ing can never be acceptable to God in itself, or as supplying any
want of the Divine nature ; but only as a sign of that devotion of
the heart, which he has declared to be pleasing to Him, and by
virtue of which it is at the same time in the highest degree bene-
ficial to the offerer : so that the benefit to man is a measure of the
degree in which it is acceptable to God. But when the offering is
of a permanent kind, as an ecclesiastical endowment, a large
experience has abundantly shown that the sign may remain after
the thing signified has passed away ; that it may become a form
without the substance, a letter without the spirit : unmeaning as a
sign ; powerless as an instrument ; worthless alike to God and
man. In such a case, unless the sacredness of the original des-
tination is held to impress it with an indelible character,
independent of all vicissitudes of public affairs, and all changes in
social relations, the State would be not only exercising a right,
but discharging a duty, in applying it to other uses. This may be
admitted or denied. Here are two opinions between which we are
at liberty to choose, but we must make our choice between the
* Memoir of Keble, by Six John Coleridge, p. 518.
220
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
two. We are not at liberty to adopt both, and to use this for one
purpose, and that for another. We may lay down the principle
that every alienation — or, as it is called, secularization — of
in what Church property is sacrilege, and, as such, absolutely
comes «acri- forbidden by God's Law ; that whatever has been once
so consecrated to a pious use, has become in such a sense
the property of God, as to be for ever withdrawn from the disposal
of the State ; that no failure of the original intention, no abuse or
perversion, however gross, of the instrument designed to promote
the glory of God and the welfare of man, to purposes most directly
adverse to both, can divest it of its sacred character. That is a
proposition which, if we follow it out into its consequences, it may
seem to need some hardihood to maintain, when we think of the
enormous wealth which flowed into the Church in the tenth cen-
tury, through the prevailing expectation that the end of the world
was at hand ; and of the way in which those endowments were
employed before the Reformation in our own and other lands. It
would even raise the question, whether, according to this descrip-
tion, sacrilege must not be oftener a duty than a sin. But still
the position is intelligible and self-consistent. It is held by the
Church of Rome, which, identifying the Church with the clergy,
and the interests of the clergy with the interests of God, regards
every alienation of ecclesiastical property, though acquired through
ignorant credulity, or, as so large a part of her temporal dominion,
by fraud and forgery, as a robbery of God. But if we commit
ourselves to this position, we must abide by it. We may not say
of the same act, it is one which cannot be justified by any reasons,
because it is sacrilege ; and it is sacrilege because no sufficient
reason can be assigned for it. The charge of sacrilege must occupy
the foremost place, to the exclusion of every other argument, or
there is no room for it at all. If we once let in the consideration
of reasons, which may or may not justify the act, the charge can
serve no purpose but that of fastening an ugly name on an opinion
from which we dissent. But unless the view I have taken of
the history and peculiar features of the Irish Church question is
altogether erroneous, it is hard to conceive one which can present
CHARGES.
221
greater difficulties, both of theory and of practice, or in which
more room is open for honest difference of opinion, and in which,
therefore, an imputation of evil motives, or of moral blindness, is
less justified by the state of the case.
But though I cannot share the opinion of those who consider
the subject as by its very nature withdrawn from the proposition
I • • o -i-iTi - Tii intneHousa
legitimate range of statesmanly deliberation, 1 deeply of Lords
° b J respecting
lament the way in which it has appeared necessary to deal $Jfu^h
with it. I believe that the modification proposed in surPlus-
the Upper House of Parliament in the disposal of the surplus,
would have been more generally beneficial, more in accordance
with the professed object of the measure, more conciliatory to Irish
feelings. It would have spared that which might have been
usefully retained, while it gave that which, so given, would have
witnessed, more clearly than in any other form, to the sincerity of
our good-will. I can see no force in any of the objections which
have been made to it, on the ground of principle. I think it is
through misapprehension, or by a rhetorical artifice, that it has been
represented as an endowment of error, in the only sense in which
the phrase expresses something inconsistent and reprehensible. It
could be only by a most violent and arbitrary misconstruction that
a slight addition to the comfort of the Roman Catholic clergy, and
a relative elevation in their social position, could be interpreted as
indicating any acknowledgment of the truth of their distinguishing
tenets. I had occasion to express my views on this point in a
Charge delivered nearly twenty-five years ago, with reference to
the Grant to the College of Maynooth. That opinion remains
unaltered ; but in the present case it would not be necessary to
take such broad ground ; and one who disapproved of the Grant to
Maynooth, might consistently consent to such an appropriation of
Irish funds as was proposed.
At the same time I am bound to admit, that what seemed to
me most desirable appears to have been for the present im- Public optn-
, ion on the
practicable, and so opposed to the general mind and will subject,
of the country, that it would have been beyond the power of any
government to have carried it into effect. This of course does not
222
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
in the least affect the merits of the view which the voice of the
country has condemned, but it is decisive on the practical con-
clusion. Public opinion, as well as that of each individual who
helps to compose it, may be unenlightened and misguided, but
when it has been freely formed and lawfully expressed, there is no
higher tribunal on earth that can overrule its decisions. Language
has been used of late tending to depreciate the significance of
majorities in the determination of political questions. * Certainly
they can have no weight whatever as a measure of truth ; other-
wise all the Churches of the Reformation must give way to Rome,
and Christianity to Buddhism. But until some one shall have
devised a more satisfactory mode of deciding the course of political
action, it seems useless to murmur against that which has been
sanctioned by the universal experience of mankind in all countries
and in all ages. It may be a very clumsy expedient, but the only
alternative hitherto discovered is either anarchy, or stagnation of
public affairs.
The claims of Justice are absolute and inflexible. She cannot
Justice of waive them. They are entitled to precedence over all
church dis- calculations of expediency, and no such calculations can
establish- r .
ment. Jea(j to any result more certain than the maxim that, in
the affairs of nations as of individuals, justice is in the long run
the best policy. It is indeed perplexing to find that a measure
which to such a mind as Keble's appeared so manifestly just, is
denounced by other excellent men as a monstrous wrong, and we
can only suppose that those who judge of it so oppositely, consider
it from widely different points of view : the one party perhaps
from the English the other from the Irish side. But this is a case
in which the consideration of consequences cannot be wholly ex-
cluded from the view of justice itself: as it is impossible to
separate the question of right and wrong from that of good and
evil. Speculation on the political effects of this great change
would here be out of place. I will only remark that its most
sanguine advocates have never represented it as a panacea for the
evils of Ireland, or denied that its success, as a measure of paci-
* Birks u. s. chap. vii. On Parliamentary and Local Majorities.
CHARGES.
223
fication, will turn upon that of other remedies which remain to be
tried. The final result must depend on the combination of a
general diffusion of material well-being, with a general sense of
just government. As long as either of these is wanting, there
must be discontent and disaffection. When we look back at the
past, we may easily be inclined to despair of ever undoing the
work of so many centuries, during which there has been a constant
accumulation of the elements of discord and hatred. But a
government can have no right to despair, until it has exhausted
all the resources at its command for the attainment of an object
so essential to the welfare and safety of the empire. But our
interest in this matter is, if not wholly absorbed, at least for the
present chiefly occupied by the consequences which it seems to
portend to the Church in Ireland and at home. And on these
you may naturally expect that I should say a few words.
It is not surprising that the suddenness of the blow which has
fallen on the Irish Church, should have inclined those Effectsofthe
disesta-
who feel the deepest interest in her cause, to take a kiishment.
gloomy view of her prospects, to exaggerate the difficulties and
dangers of her future career, and to overlook the more cheering
aspects of the case. No doubt there is cause sufficient for painful
anxiety ; but I firmly believe that there are still stronger grounds
for hope and confidence. The new Church will remain united as
closely as ever to the Church of England by a spiritual bond,
which will not be the less strong, rather all the more so, because it
is perfectly free. Subject to this voluntary union, it will enjoy
the fullest liberty of self-government. There are, as we all know,
not a few among our own brethren who consider this liberty as so
desirable, that in their opinion it outweighs all the advantages of
an Establishment, which without it are in their eyes but gilded
fetters, the price of a degrading bondage. I entirely dissent from
this opinion. I have no sympathy with the motives of those who
hold it. I believe that the kind of liberty which they desire would
be a grinding tyranny, and the worst calamity that could befall
the Church. But I do not on that account doubt that the liberty
which the unestablished Irish Church will enjoy, subject as it will
224
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
be to that condition of union with the Church of England, and
regulated, as I trust it will be, by a prudent caution, will be a very
great advantage. Henceforward the Church will possess synodical
assemblies, constituted, it may be confidently hoped, on a much
broader and firmer basis than our own. And these assemblies will
meet, not merely for discussion, but for deliberation. They will
need no precarious Licence, either to enter upon their conferences
or to carry their resolutions into effect. They will even lend a
new value and importance to the debates of the English Convoca-
tions. We shall no longer be saddened by the thought, that so
much learning and eloquence, so much laborious research, so many
instructive Reports, so many valuable suggestions as are stored in
their records, are condemned to lie barren, for want of power to
turn them to a practical account. There will be, on the other
side of the Channel, a Body able to profit by whatever it may
find useful in them.
capacity of ■^jn^ most certainly the witness which this Church will
churchto continue to bear to the truth will be at least as earnest,
ground as weighty, as powerful as ever. Is there then reason
against
Romanism, to fear, that it will notwithstanding be so crippled by
the failure of material resources, as to be unable to hold its
ground against Romanism ? That superior organization of the
Romish hierarchy, on which so much stress has been laid, as
rendering the contest hopelessly unequal, Little as it is to be
envied by any Christian Church, and fearful as is the price paid
for it, may be a very formidable engine, but it is not one with
which the Irish Reformed Church will have to cope for the first
time ; and its own organization most probably will, and certainly
may be, better fitted for the contest than it ever was before.
Then, when I consider the wealth of its members, and that their
liberality will be stimulated by the share they will have in the
management of its affairs, and when I remember the munificence
lately displayed by one of them in a great work of piety, I think
I see reasonable ground of hope, though I am fully aware that
the financial prosperity of an unestablished Church depends much
more on the contributions of the many than of the few. Again,
CHARGES.
225
when I think of the outburst of Protestant zeal which was evoked
by the recent measure, it seems to me that I am hardly at liberty
to imagine that it will evaporate in clamour and invective, and
leave the cause for which it professes such ardent devotion, with-
out substantial support. Least of all do I think it likely that
there will be any abatement of the Church's missionary activity,
which some years ago was attended with remarkable success,
among the Roman Catholics. There appears to be rather more
ground for the apprehension which has been expressed, that the
proselytizing movement may be carried on with increased energy,
but with some lack of discretion. On the whole, the future of
the Irish Church is, under Providence, in her own hands. There
appears to be nothing in the nature of things to prevent her from
enjoying a degree of prosperity, at least as great as in any former
period of her history.
Our sympathy with the fortunes of the Irish Church cannot be
wholly disinterested, or unaccompanied by grave refiec- Itg aiseeta
tions on the mode in which our own Church may be ^weTto
affected by that which has come to pass. I cannot agree our own
with those who consider it as paving the way for the
destruction of our own Establishment, and I am surprised that
friends of our Church should have taken pains to show that the
event which they anticipate, is a natural and logical sequel of
that which they deplore. Candour does not seem to me to require
that, in estimating our own position, we should dwell exclusively
on the points most favourable to our adversaries, and overlook
those which make for our own interests. Those who have been so
anxious to show an analogy between the cases of the two Churches
seem to have forgotten that if they succeeded in their attempt,
the result would be, not in the least to strengthen the security of
the Church which they wished to defend, but only to involve the
other in its ruin, by supplying its assailants with the most power-
ful engines for its overthrow. The whole argument proceeds on
an erroneous assumption. It supposes that a certain abstract
principle, previously laid down, had been applied to the Irish
Church, and that this principle, being also in some degree applic-
voi,. II. Q
226
BISHOP THIRLW ALL'S
able to the Church of England, would therefore be sure to be
applied to it. This supposition is quite unwarranted by the facts
of the case, and at variance with the whole tenour of our expe-
rience. The truth is, that the peculiar features of the Irish
Establishment had presented to the minds of statesmen what,
whether rightly or wrongly, was commonly regarded as a mon-
strous anomaly and a great practical evil. In the reformation of
this abuse, the principle of religious equality was called into
action in a somewhat rough, unscientific way indeed, and, as I
think, in an unhappy form of common destitution. But, as has
often been remarked, especially by foreigners, nothing is more
alien from the character of the English mind, than a consistent
embodying of general principles in political institutions, or in
legislation. There is nothing which, as a people, we value less,
or rather which we regard with more of positive suspicion and
dislike, than that carrying out of a precedent into its logical
consequences, on which some other nations pride themselves.
"VVe rather glory in the absence of theoretical symmetry, as a sign
of the historical growth, and as a cause of the happy working, of
our Constitution.
It can be onlv when all the special features of the
No resem- * r
tweenthe" case are overlooked or ignored, that a comparison
irifh^Estab- between the English and the Irish Establishments can
seem to show resemblance, and not an almost complete
contrast. And this is true, not only in general, but with regard
to that part of the Church in which our own lot has been cast,
though it has sometimes been represented as exhibiting a close
parallel. To make one, it would be necessary in the first place
to create or revive — and only for the purpose of immediately
destroying it — an institution entirely unknown to our law, a
Church of "Wales, having, like that of Ireland, a history distinct
from that of the Church of England. It would further be neces-
sary to separate the Principality from England by a physical
partition like the Irish Channel, and also to increase its population
sevenfold. And the analogy in this respect would still not be
complete, unless there existed in the Principality a wide-spread
CHARGES.
227
desire for a political severance from England. But above all it
would be necessary that there should be an inward spiritual
partition, separating one sect of the population from the rest ; as
in Ireland, above all other countries, Protestants are separated
from Roman Catholics. I need hardly remind you, my Reverend
Brethren, how wide is the difference between the two cases in this
last particular, which is the most important of all. You are
aware of the comparatively recent origin of Welsh Origin of
. . . weish Non-
Nonconformity, that it arose for the most part within conformity.
the Church itself, through the exertions of clergymen, intended
by them not to create a schism, but to infuse new life into the
ministrations of the Church, and thus to increase its usefulness
and to strengthen its foundations ; and at how late a period the
separatist congregations which they founded, felt themselves at
liberty to receive the Sacrament of Holy Communion from any
other hands than those of episcopally ordained ministers. I need
not dwell on the painful recollection of the fatal blindness through
which the breach was widened and became seemingly irreparable.
But still, after all, what even now is that breach,
Relation
compared with that which parts Protestant from Roman ?f fTOr .
r r testant to
Catholic Ireland ? It is as a crevice caused by the cathoSc
summer heat, to a chasm opened into the depths of the Irelan ■
rocks by an earthquake. It has been urged as an argument, and
I believe it to be perfectly true as a fact, that the Irish Protestant
clergy enjoy the respect and goodwill of their Roman Cathohc
neighbours, especially of the poorer class, who willingly avail
themselves of their kindness, and entrust them with the manage-
ment of their temporal concerns. But it is equally certain that,
notwithstanding this confidence and esteem, there is not one of
those who gladly receive these benefits, who would not deem it a
mortal sin to accept the ghostly counsel, and still more to attend
the public ministrations, of their legal pastors. I need AndofNon.
not say how impossible it would be for a Romish priest to c^hmeh*-8
to join in the devotions of a Protestant place of worship. men'
How does that correspond with the state of things which we
have before our eyes ? to the crowds of Nonconformists who flock
Q 2
228
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
to our churches when the pulpit is to be filled by a popular
preacher ? to that which is in the experience of several now
present ? I have ordained not a few Nonconformist ministers,
who, sometimes at a considerable sacrifice of emoluments, sought
admission into the ministry of our Church. But in no instance
have I found that they regarded themselves as having renounced
religious convictions which had before satisfied their own souls,
and had been the ground of their teaching. It was not another
Gospel which they meant to preach in the new pulpit, or which
their new congregation desired to hear. It was just on this
account that they felt at liberty, and even bound in conscience, to
lay aside a show of dissent which betokened no substantial differ-
ence, and to become Churchmen in profession, as they had long
been at heart. Let it not be thought that I regard the questions
on which those who are called orthodox Nonconformists, are
really at variance with us as unimportant. But their importance
is of a quite secondary order, and they mostly excite much greater
interest in the clergy than in the laity ; and whatever their
importance may be, it vanishes in comparison not only with those
which are at issue between the Churches of England and of Borne,
but with those which separate members of the Church of England
who regard the Beformation as a blessing, from those who speak
of it as "an act of Divine vengeance."*
Tendency of But though I cannot view the disestablishment of the
Fon towards Irish Church in the light of a cause operating to subvert
our own
Church. that of our own country, I do think that as a sign of the
times, as an indication of the direction in which public opinion is
moving, it may well inspire the friends of our Church with uneasy
forebodings. The facts which I have stated do indeed in my
opinion sufficiently account for the strength of the adverse senti-
ment to which the Irish Establishment succumbed. But the
* As the Eev. Dr. Littledale, Priest of the Church of England. There is too
much reason to fear, that in this view he may not stand alone ; hut it may he hoped
that the amenities which accompanied the expression of this opinion, which, though
not new to those who ever heard an Italian Capuchin rail against Luther and
Calvin, sounded a little strange in the mouth of an English clergyman and
gentleman, are peculiar to the Rev. Dr. Littledale, Priest of the Church of
England.
CHAEGES.
229
manner in which its abolition was effected, the rejection of every
proposal which, however consistent with the principle of religious
equality, seemed to preserve a remnant or shadow of Establish-
ment, attest the prevalence of a feeling, which was hot confined
to the one object assailed, and which will not be content with the
victory it has won. It shows that we must not only be prepared
for a like assault, but that we must make up our minds to expect
an equally rigorous application of the principle which governed
the treatment of the Irish Church, to our own. I might point to
some other omens of less moment, but not devoid of grave signi-
ficance, which look the same way. Until very lately it Advccates
was new to us to see the views of the Liberation Society iishmenta "
adopted bv clerarymen who still minister in our Church. c™rgygofe
r Jm OJ w different
"We know indeed for what ends they advocate separation spools,
between Church and State ; why it is they are impatient of their
present position, and desire to exchange it for a congregational
independence which will enable them to advance as far as they
will toward the goal which they have in view. This may deprive
their opinion of all weight with any but those who concur in their
aims ; but it deserves nevertheless to be taken into account as one
of the corrosive and disintegrating elements which threaten the
stability of the edifice.
And as a sign of the times it does not stand alone. Voices are
heard, proceeding from an entirely different, if not directly
opposite school, not indeed calling so loudly for a dissolution
of the union between Church and State, but not less clearly
showing that it is a contingency to which the speakers look
forward, not only without fear, but with complacency and hope-
fulness. And to these must be added a third and very con-
siderable party of persons, clergy and laymen, who, while profess-
ing their desire for the continuance of the Establishment, are
constantly expressing, in the strongest language, their vehement
dissatisfaction with its present condition ; though they hardly
affect to believe that, as long as the Union lasts, the changes
which they represent as essential to the welfare of the Church, if
not to the legitimacj- of its title to that name, though by others
230
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
they arc deprecated as fraught with mischief, will ever be brought
about.
These things are signs and symptoms ; but they are more than
that : they tend to produce the effect to which they point. I
Causeof the have no commission to prophesy, nor any desire to speak
danger. smooth things. But as far as I can see by such light as
has been given me, it does not appear to me that our Church is
actually in danger from without, certainly not as the effect of
that which has befallen the Irish Church. But I think that she
is threatened with very serious danger from within. The safety
of her temporal state must, so far as earthly agencies are con-
cerned, depend ultimately on public opinion ; and it seems to me
beyond a doubt, that what has been going on within our pale,
especially during the last ten years, has acted with great force on
public opinion, and has tended more and more to turn it against
her. And the danger is not confined to the loss of her temporal
position. If that was all, though I should think it an evil not
likely to be counterbalanced by any advantage which it is reason-
able to expect, still I should not contemplate it with despondency.
I should be ready to hope that it may be overruled, so as in the
end to work for our good. But I cannot look forward with the
same equanimity to the ulterior consequences of the event, which
present themselves to my mind as inevitable. For it seems to me
hardly possible to doubt that the final result would be the dis-
itedisestab- ruption of the Church into two or three sects, one of
would in- which would probablv, sooner or later, be merged in the
volve dis- . .
ruption. Church of Rome. There would be diverse Anglican
Churches, but no longer a Church of England. Who could
pretend to forecast the effects of such a dismemberment on the
Colonial Churches, or our foreign missions ? It is enough to say
that it is the state to which our chief adversary, whom nothing
can satisfy but our destruction, most eagerly desires, and is most
actively labouring to see us reduced.
A Church may perish through decay of its vital forces, may
shrivel up into a mere form, from which the spirit has fled, and
for which nothing can be more desirable than that it should be
CHARGES.
231
swept away to make room for a living reality. But the spectacle
of a Church going to wreck through the opposite cause, through
an exuberance of vigour wasted in internal conflicts, is even more
painful to contemplate. But as long as it is not a mere Necessityfor
possibility, but a real and actually imminent danger, it d£n^finhe
is right that we should keep it steadily in view, because ™ew"
it has a most important bearing on practical questions, which are
constantly coming before us, and calling for decision. I trust I
hardly need say that I do not mean to suggest any unmanly sup-
pression of opinion, still less any compromise of truth. But I
think there is a special call upon us, " seriously to lay to heart
the great dangers we are in by our unhappy divisions ; " not to
do any thing which it would not be our duty to do at all times ;
but to do it under a more solemn sense of personal, individual
responsibility ; to be more than ever careful that we do not in our
several spheres of action needlessly increase those dangers by the
manner in which we give effect or expression to our opinions ;
that we do not set stumbling-blocks in the way of our brethren ;
that we abstain from all that can only serve to provoke passion
and kindle strife ; that we take pains to discriminate between
things essential and things indifferent, and make sure never to
sacrifice peace to any thing less sacred than Divine truth.
The length at which I have been led to dwell on these topics
will not, I hope, have appeared disproportioned to their interest
and importance. But the remark I have just made, naturally
turns our thoughts to the causes of that inward ferment and
distraction which has assumed so threatening an aspect. I dealt
with this subject so largely in my last Charge, that it Recent ^
will be sufficient for me now to touch briefly on some of Ritualism,
the recent phases through which it has passed. So much has
been said and written of late, which tends to a confusion of ideas
on the state of the question, that it may be useful to recall it dis-
tinctly to our minds.
It has been observed with much truth, though with little rele-
vancy, that the Ritualistic movement corresponds to a general
tendency of the age in which we live, toward a larger application
232
BISHOr THIRL WALL'S
of the Fine Arts to public and private purposes.* It was impos-
sible, it is said, that tbe effect of this newly-awakened craving
Ritualism for the satisfaction of a more refined and intelligent taste,
the applica-
tion of the should not manifest itself in all material objects connected
Fine Arts to J
religion. with the public exercise of religion. May it not be
considered as a duty virtually implied in the precept, " Let all
things be done decently and in order ? "f So the condition, out-
ward and inward, of our sacred buildings, and even of our school-
rooms, which satisfied former generations, is in our day felt to be
no longer tolerable. Why then, it is asked, should it be thought
less natural and fitting that the influence of this feeling should be
extended to the public services of the Church ? that a craving
should arise for a larger amount of ornament in the furniture of
the sanctuary and in the vesture of the clergy ? And if outward
splendour was divinely enjoined in the Temple worship, must it
not be at least permitted in that of the Christian Church ?+
* " A Plain View of Ritualism." By Francis T. Palgrave, late Fellow of Exeter
College, Oxford, in " Macmillan's Magazine," September, 1867.
t "Let all Things be Done Decently and in Order:" a Homily by the Rev. J.
M. Rodwell, M.A.
X " The Law of Ritual." By the late Bishop Hopkins, of Vermont. This work
has been warmly greeted by persons with whom, as to the root of the matter, the
author certainly felt any thing rather than sympathy, and who, on that very
account, have actively circulated the book, as if it had been the admission of a
reluctant witness in favour of their views. The Bishop's position is, that the
Ceremonial Law was not abrogated, but continues in force, except as to the
Gentiles, and as to the Jews in points — such as the limitation of the priesthood and
animal sacrifices —in which it would have been inconsistent with the Christian
Revelation. He grounds this opinion partly on the absence of a formal express
abrogation, partly on the fact that the Apostles taught daily in the Temple, and
used the synagogues for the like purpose ; but mainly on the two concessions made
by St. Paul to Jewish feelings, in the circumcising of Timothy (Acts xvi. 3), and in
his own association with the persons under a vow (Acts xxi. 26). As to the last, it
may be observed that it was a voluntary act, not involving any doctrinal principle.
As to the former, the narrative itself shows that St. Paul did not take the step
because it was prescribed in the Law, but " because of the Jews." If a clergyman
who had made a disciple of a Quaker, was to baptize him, because of his brother
clergy or of parishioners, he could not believe Baptism to be a Sacrament of Christ.
But it must also be remembered that though we may hardly possess sufficient data
forjudging St. Paul's conduct, we have no surer guarantee of his infallibility in a
matter of discipline than he himself had of St. Peter's (Gal. ii. 11). By this process
Bishop Hopkins is led to a somewhat startling conclusion. " If," he says, p. 30,
" in the Providence of God, a Church should again arise, consisting of converted
Jews, or if individual Jews should be added from time to time, as members of a
CHARGES.
233
The justice of these remarks is unquestionable, as long as they
are confined to the abstract, and kept clear of all direct bearing
on the practical question. We thankfully rejoice in the How far the
craving for
happy change which has renovated the face of the church or-
4 * ' 0 nament is
Church with goodly buildings, and has in many respects beneficial,
brought the mode of conducting Divine Service to a closer observ-
ance of the Apostolic precept. No greater injury can be done to
the cause of Protestant truth, than to represent it as inconsistent
with either cheerfulness or solemnity in public worship, and as
compelling those who desire to worship in the beauty of holiness,
to seek it elsewhere than in the Church of England. We may go
farther, and concede that the gorgeousness of the Temple worship
is not in itself absolutely unlawful, or excluded by any Divine
command from the Christian sanctuary, however questionable
may be the propriety of introducing it with regard to the use of
edifying ; though we cannot admit that the pattern of the Temple
ought to regulate the worship of the Church. The idea of such
an imitation arose after the love of the Church had begun to wax
cold, and it was more and more developed as the primitive purity
of faith and practice declined. But it is idle to discuss these
points when the real question is, Whether our Commu- The real
nion Office is to be transformed into the closest possible ques lon'
resemblance to the Romish Mass ? We shall not find our way
the more easily to any conclusion on that question, by means of
Church which belongs to Gentiles, I do not see by what warrant we could forbid those
Jews to imitate the course of the Apostles, or count it an error in them to circumcise
their children, and 'walk orderly, and keep the Law.'" Circumcision would not
indeed, in those cases, be more generally necessary to salvation than Baptism ; but,
according to this theory, it would be no less so ; and a clergyman who admitted a
Jewish convert into the Church, would not only have no right to " count it an error
in him to circumcise his children," but be bound to exhort him to do so. As the
excellent author himself is no longer able to develop his theory into the necessary
practical details, it remains for the admirers of his work to solve a number of
curious questions as to the two ordinances, when cumulative; as whether the elder
is equally a means of grace with the other, and consequently confers a benefit of
which the children of Gentiles are deprived ; and, then, why they should be de-
prived of it ? One corollary of this theory is, that the whole Christian world has,
from the beginning, been guilty of a gross breach of the Divine Law in omitting
the observance of the seventh day, which was never expressly abrogated. There is
nothing else in the Bishop's work sufficiently new or important to call for notice.
234
BISHOP THIELWALL's
any general statements either on the employment of the Fine
Arts for religious purposes, or on the propriety of grafting the
Jewish ritual on the New Dispensation. The most strenuous
advocates of the movement themselves indignantly repudiate the
supposition, that their object is simply to make the service more
attractive. In their eyes the whole value of ceremonial consists
in its significance as a visible symbol of doctrine ;* and the ques-
tion is as to the right of individual clergymen to introduce innova-
tions of such a character. This right was claimed on the ground
of the language of the Church in the Rubrics of the Prayer Book.
But this language was so far from clear, that lawyers of the
highest eminence took opposite views of its meaning.
Still there can be no doubt that every clergyman, however
The right of wanting in familiarity with legal reasoning, however
individual destitute of learning, and of all qualifications that could
opinion on
the Rubrics. g{ve the slightest weight to his opinion, is at full liberty
to form one for himself, and to hold it with the firmest convic-
tion. But if, not content with this, he attempts to impose his
private judgment upon the Church, and makes his public minis-
trations a vehicle for publishing them in her name, and as with
her authority, he is abusing the privilege of his position, and
usurping a licence irreconcilable with law and order. And the
door thus thrown open for the wildest play of individual caprice,
is indefinitely widened when each clergyman takes upon him to
interpret the Rubric according to his private idea of something
which he calls Catholic usage. And from this we may see the
futility of the plea which is often urged in defence of these pro-
ceedings, that they are at least more harmless than unsound doc-
trine, which clergymen sometimes utter with impunity through
the press and the pulpit. This would be something to the point,
if those clergymen altered the language of the Prayer Book, to
make it express their opinions. That is an abuse of which I have
* Sec the evidence of Mr. Bennett before the Eitual Commission : " 2606. Is any
doctrine involved in your using the chasuble ? I think there is. — 2607. What is
that doctrine ? The doctrine of the sacrifice. — 2608. Do you consider yourself a
sacrificing priest? Distinctly so. — 2611. Then you think you offer a propitiatory
sacrifice ? Yes, I think I do offer a propitiatory sacrifice.
CHARGES.
235
not yet heard ; but for which, if it occurred, a legal remedy is
provided.
It seems clear that a law so ambiguous and obscure as to lend
itself to the most widely divergent interpretations, Anambi.
cannot serve the purpose of a rule to guide any one's §SC^.
conduct. Practically, it is no more a law than if it useless-
were written in an unknown tongue. One who professes to be
governed by it, in the sense which he chooses to adopt, is really
making a law for himself ; and when he does so in contravention
of the general long-received usage of the Church, he is sacrificing
peace and charity to a selfish spirit and a lawless will. Even a
judicial decision can never impart more than a temporary and
insecure authority to any one of the conflicting interpretations.
It can only indicate that, to the mind of the Court, the weight of
argument appeared to turn the scale on this side. It is no doubt
binding in practice, as long as it remains unreversed, on all alike,
whether they assent to it or not. But it can have no greater
intrinsic value than that of the arguments on which it rests. Yet
the Rubric commonlv called the Ornaments Rubric — Ornaments
J Rubric the
on which so many volumes have been written, proving ^°™of
nothing more clearly than the hopelessness of arriving practices.10
at any satisfactory conclusion on its legal force — has been taken
as the groundwork of the Ritualistic practices, with a confidence
as strong as if it left no room for the slightest doubt. It appeared
to some — and among others to our late lamented Primate* — that
this was a case for which provision had been made in the Preface
of the Prayer Book, where it is directed that, " for the resolution
of all doubts concerning the manner how to understand, do, and
execute the things contained in this Book, the parties that so
doubt or diversely take any thing, shall alway resort to the Bishop
of the Diocese, 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." It has, how-
ever, been ruled by the highest authority, the Supreme Court of
Appeal, that the Bishop can have no jurisdiction to modify or
* In his posthumous Charge, p. 16.
236
BISHOP THIRLWALI/S
dispense with any thing expressly ordered or prohibited in a
Bishops Rubric ; and it appears to be now well understood, that
have no
modifyor ^e direction m the Preface applies only to cases where,
iriXany through the absence of such express order or prohibition,
Kubrick a latitude is given for diversity of opinion, and for the
exercise of discretion ; but that it was not intended to give the
Bishop jurisdiction in his domestic forum, to decide whether a
thing is ordered or probibited by a Rubric. But if this is beyond
the power of a Bishop, can it be within the discretion of a
Presbyter ? Can he be allowed to plead the steadfastness of his
reliance on his own private judgment, as a proof that no " doubt
has arisen " in the matter ? The direction in the Preface does
not empower the Bishop to solve the legal doubt. But the
spirit of the direction, taken as a rule of charity, of humility, of
modesty, seems eminently appHcable to this case. It is hard to
conceive one in which it would more become a clergyman to con-
sult his Bishop, before he took a step which, whether legally
justifiable or not, was so sure to give offence to many, and to open
a fresh breach in the Church ; and this is equally true whether
the matter in dispute be accounted of great or of little importance.
To most persons this whole question of vestments appears to be in
itself something exceedingly small and petty. And one of the
leading Ritualists admits, that " in trivial and immaterial things
it would be natural to follow the Bishop's advice." But in his
eyes the vestments are " important things," and therefore as to
them " the Bishop has no authority." They are too important to
be submitted to the judgment of the Bishop, but not too important
to be determined by that of any clergyman in his diocese, and
that not even professedly according to the directions of the Prayer
Book, but according to tbe " rules of the Catholic Church," of
which he claims to be a fully competent interpreter.*
It was generally felt that the peace and the honour of the
Church required that an end should be put to this state of confusion
and anarchy ; and a Royal Commission was appointed with that
* See Mr. Bennett's examination before the Ritual Commission, p. 83, 3024. 3030.
3031. 3033.
CHARGES.
237
view. But, in the meanwhile, proceedings were instituted to try
the legality of the recent practices ; and the result naS Appoint -
i i • i ment of a
been that, on every point hitherto contested m the Royal com-
*^ 1 mission on
Ecclesiastical Courts — points, it must be remembered, on Ritualism,
which the innovators assumed the law to be so clearly on their side,
as not even to admit of any doubt or diversity of opinion — on every-
one of these points their departure from the long-received usage,
has, by the Supreme Court of Appeal, been pronounced illegal.
The questions mooted were the elevation of the paten and cup
during the Prayer of Consecration, kneeling and prostra- Questions
tion before the consecrated elements, the Lighting of the legal
proceed-
candles on the Communion Table during the celebration, ^ss.
the using of incense, and the mixing of water with the wine used in
the administration of the Holy Communion. There was no doubt
as to the antiquity of all these ceremonies, nor that some were
things indifferent, and not at variance with any principle of the
Reformed Church. And in favour of the use of lights it was
urged — and successfully before the learned Judge of the Court of
Arches — that they symbolized Christ as the light of the World.*
It seems to have been overlooked that, when placed on the Com-
munion Table during the celebration of the Holy Communion,
though not on the pulpit at the Sermon, they must be supposed
to have some more peculiar significance, and that this could be no
other than that to which the Incense, the Elevation, the Kneeling
and Prostration also pointed. But the ground on which they were
condemned was not their significance, but simply that they had
not been adopted by the Church of England. And after having
laid down the broad principle of their decision, the Court makes a
remark which seems to me pregnant with larger conclusions : —
" Their Lordships have not referred to the usage as to opinion of
lights during the last 300 years ; but they are of opinion upon lights,
that the very general disuse of lights after the Reformation
* Mr. Rodwell, in the above-cited Homily, p. 16, gives a different interpretation,
founded on the number of the lights, and treats it as a well-known fact : " Of
course, you know that the candles lighted on the altar signify the light of faith
revealed to Jews and Gentiles — the two natures of Christ, the Divine and human,
united in His sacred person." Why not the two sacraments ?
238
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
(whatever exceptional cases to the contrary might be produced)
contrasted with their normal and prescribed use previously, affords
a very strong contemporaneous and continuous exposition of the
law upon the subject."
I need hardly point out the bearing of this remark on the
construe- question of the Vestments. But I must observe that
Rubric be6- there is a passage in the Judgment which has been
Prayer of diversely interpreted, and which threatens to disturb
Consecra- . » . „ .
tion- that uniformity of practice which it was its general
object to promote. Speaking of the Rubric before the Prayer of
Consecration, the Committee say, " Their Lordships entertain no
doubt on the construction of this Rubric, that the priest is
intended to continue in one posture during the prayer, and not to
change from standing to kneeling, or vice versa ; and it appears to
them equally certain that the priest is intended to stand, and not
to kneel. They think that the words ' standing before the Table '
apply to the whole sentence ; and they think that this is made
more apparent by the consideration that acts are to be done by the
priest before the people as the prayer proceeds (such as the taking
the paten and chalice into his hands, breaking the bread, and
laying his hands on the various vessels) which could only be
done in the attitude of standing." This has been construed as
ruling that the priest is to remain standing in front of the Table
throughout the Prayer of Consecration. But it must be observed
that the Court was not called upon to decide any question as to
the position of the minister, but only as to his posture ; and that
the context seems clearly to show that it was this alone they had
in view. The whole relates to the alternative of standing or
kneeling ; and the reason assigned for the attitude of standing
applies equally, if not with greater force, in favour of the usual
position. I think, therefore, that a clergyman would be ill-
advised who, until this question shall have been judicially decided,
should turn his back to the people during the Prayer of Consecra-
tion. No doubt, if it was clear that this was the meaning of the
Judgment, it ought to be obeyed. But I think that the best way
of so doing would be for the minister to stand before the table
CHARGES.
239
with his face to the congregation, which I believe to have been
the primitive usage, as well as the only one which fully carries
out the direction of breaking bread before the peojile.
It was to be expected that a judgment which not only forbade
practices to which the Ritualists were strongly attached, The Judg-
but convicted them of rash presumption in acting with tasteful to
. . . theRitua-
such confidence on a private opinion which turned out to nsts-
be erroneous, should provoke loud complaints and be vehemently
assailed. I may be allowed to believe that, in a question of law,
the learned persons who delivered that judgment under such grave
responsibility were, at least, as competent to form a sound opinion
as any of the theologians by whom it has been impugned. Still
every one is, of course, at liberty to think as he will for himself,
and to believe that he is in possession of the truth which had
eluded their investigation. But it could hardly have been
expected that clergymen should have been found to set the judg-
ment at defiance, and to persist in the practices which it has
unequivocally condemned. Some however, it seems, have done so
in professed obedience to a higher law of the Catholic Church,
which overrules the decisions of every secular tribunal. And it
must be observed that when they appeal to that higher law, what
they really mean is nothing more than their own interpretation of
it. In other words, it is their own private judgment which they
set up as the Supreme Court of Appeal and measure of truth.
The Vestment question still awaits a judicial decision, which
may or may not be conformable to the general principle Further
laid down in the passage I have cited from the Judg- on'thedings
. . Vestment
ment of the Judicial Committee. In the meanwhile the question,
discussion it has undergone has, I think, placed it in so clear a
light as to leave no room for doubt in any impartial mind on the
most important practical points. That the Church, which has the
right to restore purity of doctrine, has full authority to regulate
the official dress of her ministers, can hardly be denied, except by
those who would exalt the outward above the inward. But it is
our happiness also to know that the almost universal feeling which
discarded the gaudy pre-Reformation vestments, and retained the
240
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
surplice as the most fitting garb for the celebration of the Lord's
Supper, as well as of every other part of Divine service, is in
perfect accordance with that of primitive Christianity, which sub-
sisted until the Church, through the sinister influence of Rome,
began to be corrupted and disfigured by an imitation of the
Temple worship.
Vestments of In the earlier ages a Christian who read in the
tive church. Apocalypse the description of the woman "arrayed in
purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold, and precious
stones, and pearls," could not recognize an image of the Church
of Christ : he could only view her apparel as proper to the
" mother of abominations."* It was not through poverty that the
Church abstained from such ornaments. "We have the fullest
evidence that vestments of brilliant colours were regarded by
Christians as heathenish, unmanly, and meretricious, fit only for
the stage, or for the rites of Pagan superstition, in which they
were worn by the sacrificing priests. On the other hand, white
raiment satisfied all their wants of appropriate symbolism, and
appeared to them most truly beautiful. The thing which would
probably have amazed them most of all would have been to hear
that the ornaments which in their minds were associated with all
that was most profane, effeminate, and impure, were the best
fitted for the celebration of their holiest mysteries. Yet these
ornaments are often described as essential parts of " Catholic "
Ritual, as if during the first four centuries the Church was not
Catholic. Their absence is said to make our worship cold, bare,
and naked. Let us console ourselves with the reflection that, if it
is less fervent than that of the Church of the Martyrs, it is not
because either our sacred buildings, or the persons of our ministers,
are less richly adorned ; and that the outward splendour was
never in any age a help toward reviving declining fervour of
devotion, but only a very poor substitute for it. We may also
infer with great confidence from all we know, that the need or
propriety of a peculiar vestment for solemnizing the Lord's
Supper — which is now insisted on almost as an axiom — never
* Rev. xvii. 4, J.
CHARGES.
241
entered the minds of those early Christians ; though, if it bad, the
vestments adopted by the Ritualists after the Romish fashion, are
the last they would have chosen for the purpose. If these are
expressive of any doctrine, it must be one which either was not
held by the early Church, and therefore is not Catholic, or which
the Church did not think it right so to express.*
The doctrine which is now propounded under the name of the
Real Objective Presence is, as I believe, no less foreign The real
to the faith of the primitive Church than the modern Presence,
symbolism to its practice. In the sense — if it may be so called —
attached to it by its leading advocates, it appears to me to have
no warrant either in Scripture or in genuine ancient tradition.
Nevertheless, I think it much to be lamented that any statement
of this doctrine, purporting to be in accordance with the mind of
the Church of England, should be made the subject of penal pro-
secution. It still appears to me — as I expressed myself on a
similar occasion in my Charge of 1857 — that, "to sustain a charge
of unsound doctrine, involving penal consequences, nothing ought
to suffice but the most direct unequivocal statements, asserting
that which the Church denies, or denying that which she asserts."
Since I last addressed you, the question has been publicly raised
by a Memorial on the Doctrine of the Eucharist, which ,r
J Memorial on
was presented to our late Primate. It was signed by 0ftheCtrm8
twenty-one clergymen, all more or less distinguished Euchanst-
members of the Ritualistic party, though not all adopting the
Ritualistic practices, and including one eminently learned theo-
logian. But its importance does not depend upon these signatures;
for it is clearly to be considered as the manifesto of a great party
in the Church ; and, viewing it in that light, I think I am hardly
at liberty to pass it over in silence.
It divides itself into three heads : the Doctrine of the Real
Objective Presence, of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, and of the Adora-
tion of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament ; and under each, states
first the opinion which the memorialists repudiate, and then the
doctrine which they hold. Under the first head they repudiate
* See Marriott, " Vestiariurn Christianum," chaps, iii. iv.
VOL. II. R
242
BISHOP TIIIRLWALL'S
the opinion of a " Corporal Presence of Christ's natural Flesh
and Blood ;" that is to say, of the Presence of His Body
Its language ' *
Co^orla an(^ Blood as They " are in heaven ; " and the conception
Presence. Q£ ^g jj0(je 0£ jj^g presence, which implies the physical
change of the natural substances of the Bread and Wine, com-
monly called " Transuhstantiation." They believe that in the
Holy Eucharist, by virtue of the Consecration, through the power
of the Holy Ghost, the Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ, "the
inward part or Thing signified," are Present, really and truly, but
spiritually and ineffably, under "the outward visible part or sign,"
or " form of Bread and Wine."
It must be observed that, although at the outset one of tbe
Doctrines to be maintained is described as that of the Peal
Exclusion of Objective Presence, the word objective does not appear in
"objective." any of the subsequent statements ; so that it would seem
as if — in the opinion of those who framed the document — it would
have added nothing to that which is signified by the adverbs really
and trull/. But we are thus led to ask, whether these terms
themselves add any thing to that which is signified by the word
present ? For whatever is present any where at all, must be really
and truly present. But the sense which would most readily
suggest itself, when these words are used with reference to the
Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ, is that they are present
as they really and truly are, that is, as real Flesh and Blood.
But as this sense is expressly repudiated, unless they are merely
superfluous adjuncts, they must have some other meaning which is
not explained in the context, and is not very easy to find. There
are two senses in which we may speak intelligibly of the presence
of a material object : the one literal, the other figurative.
Literally, a body is present in the space which it fills ; figura-
tively, it may be present as a thought to the mind. And in this
last sense it might be properly said to be spiritually present to the
thinking subject. But that could not be the meaning of those
who describe that which they speak of as an Objective Presence.
They seem to have used the word " spiritually " as opposed to
corporally or physically. We are therefore left to search for some
CHARGES.
243
kind of Presence which, is neither literal nor figurative. But in
what region of nature or of thought is such a Presence to be found ?
If our absolute incapacity to conceive it is not a proof that it has
no existence, at least it makes it impossible to frame any proposi-
tion concerning it, of which we could say that it is either true or
false. The only term really appropriate by which it is described in
the Memorial, is ineffable. And thus it turns out that the statement
which purports to be positive, is, in fact, merely negative. gtate_
It denies that the Presence is one of which any thing can ^Pre-
be predicated. The addition of the words, under " the positive" but
outward visible part or sign," or " form of Bread and negative'
Wine," as it only expresses what is literally present, can throw no
light on a Presence of a totally different kind. This negative
truth may be of no great value, but it is at least inoffensive. It
might even afford a basis of general agreement, if it had not been
so worded as to hold out the appearance of an affirmation which,
on closer inspection, proves fallacious. The Objective character
of the Presence was probably supposed to be marked by the
description given of it, as affected by virtue of the Consecration,
through the power of the Holy Ghost. But if the change
wrought in the elements by Consecration was purely relative, and
if we hold with Hooker that " the Real Presence of Christ's most
blessed Body and Blood is not to be sought for in the Sacrament,
but in the worthy receiver of the Sacrament," still the Presence
would not be the less Objective. It would not be the work of the
receiver, but would be brought about " through the power of the
Holy Ghost," imparting to believing souls the benefits signified by
the communion of Christ's Body and Blood.
The next thing repudiated is the notion of any fresh sacrifice,
or any view of the Eucharistic sacrificial offering, as of Repudiation
something apart from the One All-sufficient Sacrifice tions on the
• i/^i • Eucharistic
and Oblation on the Cross, which alone is that perfect Sacrifice.
Redemption, Propitiation, and Satisfaction for all the sins of the
whole world, both original and actual, and which alone is " meri-
torious." To this is opposed the belief that, "as in heaven
Christ our great High Priest ever offers Himself before the
e. 2
244
BISHOP THIEL WALL'S
Eternal Father, pleading by His Presence His sacrifice of Him-
self once offered on the Cross, so on earth in the Holy Eucharist,
that same Body, once for all sacrificed for us, and that same
Blood once for all shed for us, Sacramentally present, are offered
and pleaded before the Father by the Priest, as our Lord ordained
to be done in remembrance of Himself, when He instituted the
Blessed Sacrament of His Body and Blood."
In this last statement there is a remarkable omission,
Differences
j^Ceie-moae doubtless not unintentional, and a little perplexing.
Eucharist6 While it speaks of the Holy Eucharist, it takes no notice
of any difference between one mode of celebrating the
Eucharist and another. The whole description is perfectly
applicable to the Roman Mass. But it seems rather too much to
assume that whatever is true of the Mass, also holds with respect
to our " Order of the Administration of the Lord's Supper, or
Holy Communion." Yet the motive assigned for publishing the
Memorial was the desire to repel imputations of disloyalty to the
Church of England, which are said to be current, to the discredit
of those who inculcate and defend the doctrines set forth in it.
For this purpose an expression of belief in the doctrine of the
Mass would seem, to say the least, irrelevant, and some farther
definition of the Eucharist, as administered in the Liturgy of the
Church of England, almost indispensable. We must at least
assume that our Liturgy was not meant to be excluded from the
scope of the statement, and it is with this alone that we, as
ministers or members of the Church of England, have any concern.
The comparison itself seems to lie open to the objection, that it
inverts the rule dictated by common sense, and instead
Comparison ■» '
MaSeendhe °f illustrating that which is obscure by that which is
munion clear, affects to illustrate that which is clear by that
Service
which is most profoundly and impenetrably obscure.
The nature of the heavenly intercession is a mystery transcending
all our powers of thought and imagination, and which human
speech is utterly incompetent to express. How then can it shed
any light, if that were needed, on the work of the priest in the
celebration of the Eucharist? And if it was intended as an
CHARGES.
245
argument to the effect that, because Christ offers Himself in
heaven, therefore it is the object of the Eucharist to make the
same offering on earth, the argument would be as illogical as the
comparison is misapplied. But when, waiving this objection, we
proceed to test the justice of the comparison by reference to our
Eucharist, as administered in our own Communion Office, we find
that there is not a word to suggest it to any mind not previously
imbued with the opinion, and which did not import it into the
words against their plain and natural meaning. It is not to any
transaction which is taking place in the heavenly sanctuary
that the Church turns our thoughts in the Prayer of Consecra-
tion, but to that which took place in the guest-chamber at Jeru-
salem at the institution of the Lord's Supper. By what interpre-
tation she is made to speak a different language, we shall see
presently.
But the faultiness of a comparison need not affect the truth of
the proposition which it is designed to illustrate or confirm. If
in this case there had been no comparison, it would have been
equally true, or equally false, that " on earth in the Holy
Eucharist that same Body once for all sacrificed for us, and that
same Blood once for all shed for us, Sacramentally Present, are
offered and pleaded before the Father by the priest." Is Are the
A J r statements
then this statement true or false ? or rather, Is it, or is JhePEucha-
it not, consistent with the doctrine of our Church ? I tent^ththe
l i i t i doctiiue of
can only say that when I analyze the statement, and our church
examine the several propositions involved in it, I can find none
that any Churchman, however he might prefer to express himself
in different terms, is bound to reject. None, I think, would deny
that the Sacrifice pleaded by the Church, as well in her Com-
munion Office as whenever she prays through, or in the name, or
for the sake of Jesus Christ, is the Sacrifice of the same Body
which suffered on the Cross. And as to the Presence, the expres-
sion " sacramentally present " appears to be most happily adapted
to comprehend every possible shade of opinion, as some kind of
Presence is admitted by all, and none question that it is one
according, and not contrary, to the nature of a Sacrament. An
246
BISHOP THIELW ALL'S
agreement depending on the ambiguity of language cannot indeed
be perfectly satisfactory ; but it may be tbe best that the nature
of the question permits.
As the statement begins with a comparison which was not
essential, so it ends with a remark which may be separated from
it without altering its character. It is, "as our Lord ordained,
to be done in remembrance of Himself, when He instituted the
Words of Blessed Sacrament of his Body and Blood." That what
institution. -g ^one -n our Qr(jer 0f ^e Administration of the Lord's
Supper is done according to His holy institution, is of course the
belief of our whole Church : so that to a person not conversant
with the controversies of the day, the remark might have seemed
superfluous. But, in fact, it is so far from expressing any thing
on which all are agreed, that I believe the opinion to which it
alludes is that of a very small minority. It is that the words of
Institution, recorded by St. Luke, and recited in our Prayer of
Consecration, have been mistranslated and generally misunder-
stood ; that the Greek word rendered do properly means sacrifice,
and that the word rendered remembrance also signifies a sacrificial
memorial* I believe this to be altogether a mistake, and that
the argument as to the word rendered do moves in a vicious circle,
and assumes the thing to be proved. It is true that the Greek
verb in the Septuagint often has the sense of sacrifice or offer ; but
only when the noun which it governs signifies that which is a
victim or offering, and thus determines the sense of the verb. But
in the words of Institution, that which we render this has no such
sense, except on the hypothesis which is to be demonstrated.
Equally arbitrary is the sense attached to the word remembrance
as implying sacrifice ; which must always depend on the context.
The view which our Church takes of this point, seems sufficiently
evident from the words which she uses in the delivery of the
consecrated elements. She nowhere indicates any other. But I
need hardly say that no clergyman is bound to acknowledge the
correctness of the authorized version of Scripture, even in passages
where important doctrines are supposed to depend upon it.
* See the late Bishop Hamilton's Charge of 1867, p. 52.
CHARGES.
217
Under the third head, in the statement of that which is repu-
diated,, the Memorial follows the Declaration on Kneeling at the
end of the Communion Office. " We repudiate, " say the Adorationof
signers, " all ' adoration ' of * the Sacramental Bread and mental
° _ _ Bread and
Wine,' which would be ' idolatry ; ' regarding them Wine-
with the reverence due to them because of their sacramental re-
lation to the Body and Blood of our Lord. We repudiate also all
adoration of ' a corporal Presence of Christ's natural Flesh and
Blood,' that is to say, of the Presence of His Body and Blood as
they are in heaven." The doctrine asserted is thus expressed :
" We believe that Christ Himself, really and truly, but spiritually
and ineffably, present in the Sacrament, is therein to be adored."
Here are two points : the Presence of Christ in the _._ „.
* Dimciilties
Sacrament, and the adoration due to it. Enough has ttetems^of
been said already as to the effect of the words really, rePudiatlon-
truly, spiritually, and ineffably, in explaining or qualifying the
nature of the Presence. Perhaps it would have been better if the
writer had substituted for them the single word saoramentally,
which covers every thing ; not indeed conveying any distinct
thought to the mind, but leaving unbounded room for every
devout feeling of the heart. But a difficulty arises with regard
to the description of the Presence, as " in the Sacrament, " and
" therein to be adored. " Taken in their common sense, these
expressions would suggest the idea of a Presence circumscribed by
the dimensions of the visible elements, and thus would seem to
assert what is most offensive in the Roman view of the Sacrament.
But from other statements, proceeding partly from the same quarter,
and which must be regarded as equally authentic expositions of
the doctrine, it seems that we are not to consider the words in and
therein as signifying a local inwardness, which is indignantly re-
pudiated as equivalent to a material or natural Presence.* On the
* See "The Real Presence: the Worship due." Correspondence between the
Archdeacon of Taunton and the Archdeacon of Exeter.
Archdeacon Uenison (p. 14) says, "I contend for the Real Presence of the Body
and the Blood of Christ in the Holy Eucharist : for the Real Presence, not for the
local presence." I share Archdeacon Freeman's perplexity about his correspondent's
meaning, and am sorry that Archdeacon Denison insisted on his right of withholding
any further explanation, though he may have had gojd reason for despairing of
248
BISHOP THIRL W ALL'S
other hand I find expressions which I can only understand as im-
_ , _ plying that the inwardness is local ; for what else can he
Local Pre- r ■» °
tence. meant when it is said, " The true oblation in the Eu-
charist is not the Bread and "Wine — that is only as the vessel
which contains, or the garment which veils it ; "* local therefore,
but yet not after the manner in which a body fills space ; not
material nor natural, but incorporeal and supernatural ? Still such
an inwardness may not the less properly be termed local, because
divested of all the grossness of a material presence. The com-
parison of the vessel and the garment is equally familiar to us when
applied to the body as the receptacle or clothing of the soul.
And I doubt much that any one who is offended by the expression
would be reconciled to it by this explanation. On the whole, we
cannot lay too much stress on the qualification ineffably, as extend-
ing to the locality, and taking it altogether out of the reach of
language and thought.
Then there remains only the question of adoration, disentangled
from that of local or extra-local inwardness, on which there is
nothing to be said. And this question at once i-educes itself to
the single point, whether there is any real and substantial differ-
ence between that which is here said to be due to Christ, and that
which is claimed for Him by the Church in the Declaration on
Declaration Kneeling. The Kneeling of the Communicants, when
on Kneeling they receive the Lord's Supper, which is ordained by
our Office, is there explained and defended as " a signification of
our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ
therein given to all worthy Receivers." But this acknowledg-
making himself intelligible. He complains (p. 3) of having been charged with holding
the tenet, that one purpose of the Holy Eucharist is to provide the Church with an
object of Dirine Worship actually enshrined in the elements, namely, our Lord Jesus Christ.
Of course he is not answerable for the language or the doctrine of Mr. Keble. But
still, it is puzzling to find such an apparent contradiction between two such
eminent doctors of the same school, that, while the one does not scruple to speak of
the Bread and Wine as " the vessel which contains, or the garment which reils, the
true oblation in the Eucharist," the other rejects the expression, "enshrined in the
elements,'' as a calumnious imputation. Bis-hop Hamilton also (Charge, p. 50) says
of the Bread and Wine, that " by consecration it has been made the veil and channel
of an ineffable mystery."
* Keble, " Eucharistic Adoration,'' p. 70.
CHARGES.
240
ment must be made to the Divine Author of these benefits, and
then how can we distinguish such humble and grateful acknow-
ledgment from adoration ? Who among us would not be willing
to adopt the language of Keble ?* " Religious adoration is of the
heart, and not of the lips only ; it is practised in praise and thanks-
giving, as well as in prayer ; we adore as often as we approach
God in any act of Divine faith, hope, or love, with or without any
verbal or bodily expression." I cannot indeed agree with that
excellent person in his opinion, that there is a little uncertainty
as to the meaning of the Declaration, when it speaks of the
benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Receivers.f I
conceive that the use of the plural, benefits, precludes the construc-
tion that not they, but Christ Himself, is said to be given. But
it is not the less true that the result of a worthy reception is de-
scribed in our Office itself to be, that " then we dwell in Christ,
and Christ in us." Surely adoration is not too strong a word to
express the feeling suited to such an occasion. And but for the
unhappy dispute about the Real Presence, it would probably never
have appeared so to any one.
I am conscious, my Reverend Brethren, that I may seem to owe
you an apology for having detained you so long with a discussion
which to many of you may have appeared to turn on subtle and
unprofitable points of metaphysical theology. But there are
others who speak of this Real Presence as a " great funda- importance
mental matter," and a " vital doctrine of the Gospel."+ the dnctrine
of t he Real
Such an estimate of its importance will no doubt seem Presence,
strangely exaggerated to those who have been used to take a dif-
ferent view of the foundation truths of Christianity, and who have
sought in vain for any allusion to this doctrine in Holy Writ.
But every one knows best what belief is vital to himself, that is,
necessary for the support of his own spiritual life. And this
is a subject in which, above all others, I should wish the largest
room to be left for private feeling and speculation. If any one,
having been assured by the Church that the consecrated Bread
* Kehlp, " Eucharistic Adoration," p. 117- t Ibid. p. 129.
X Ibid. pp. 96, 128, 161.
2o0
BISHOP THIIILTVALI/S
and "Wine become in a certain sense the Body and Blood of Christ,
finds comfort and edification in the thought, that along with the
Sacramental Body and Blood, he in a certain sense receives the
whole Person of Christ, God and man, I think he has full right
to such edification and comfort. It is a region of mystical con-
templation and feeling, an inner chamber of the heart, into which
no stranger may intrude. I go farther. If he cannot resist the
temptation of speculating on this subject ; if he tries to conceive
and to reason upon the mode of this Presence, I should think that
he was acting unwisely, that he was overstepping the legitimate
bounds of human thought, indulging a vain and hardly reverent
curiosity ; but I could not deny that he was exercising an un-
questionable right, qualified only by his moral responsibility. If
he should argue in this way : inasmuch as the natural Body and
Blood are inseparable from the whole Divine Person of Christ, so
that wherever they are that is, therefore the same holds with regard
to the Sacramental Body and Blood, so that it also, by virtue of
the Hypostatic Union, is Christ himself;* — this to me ajDpears a
sad abuse of words, a playing with the forms of reasoning by the
arbitrary substitution of a totally different sense in the terms of
the same proposition. Nor to my view does this doctrine in the
least exalt the dignity, or enhance the value of the Sacrament as a
means of grace, but, on the contrary, tends to degrade it into the
semblance of a magical rite, and to divert the attention of the
communicant from the main ends of Holy Communion, to be-
wildering and unprofitable questions.
But I do not pretend to set up my judgment or feeling as a
Liberty of standard to which others are bound to conform. If they
thought and
speech. believe that they see a logical connexion which is entirely
hidden from me, I may wish that they should explain it, and may
think that, if that is impossible, it would have been better that
they should have kept it to themselves. But I have no right —
unless perhaps in the name of charity — to call for such expla-
* Such is Bishop Hamilton's statement, Charge, p. 50 : " The inward part of the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is Christ's precious Body and Blood, and so, by
■virtue of the Hypostatic Union, Christ Himself."
CHARGES.
251
nation ; and probably no two among tbose who hold the opinion
would agree in giving account of it. But while I would earnestly
maintain their liberty of thought and speech on this point, I
would most strenuously resist every attempt to impose their
private sentiment or speculation on the Church, as her doctrine.
I could not consent to make our Church answerable for a The Church
dogma, differing from Transubstantiation by a hardly a^for^ri-
perceptible shade of meaning or phraseology,* and ment or
speculation.
equally committing those who hold it to the belief that,
in the institution of the Supper, that which our Lord held in His
hand and gave to His disciples, was nothing less than His own
Person, Body, Soul, and Godhead. There was a time when to
show of any proposition that it involved such a consequence,
would among us have been accounted a sufficient reductio ad
absurdnm. Now I am afraid a spirit is abroad, to which Doctrine
. . repulsive to
there can be no greater recommendation of any doctrine common
sense readily
than that it shocks the common sense of mankind. This received,
creates a strong prepossession in its favour, and affords an oppor-
tunity, which is eagerly seized, of eliciting the power of language
to conceal the absence of thought, from the speaker or writer, no
less than from the hearer or reader. It may be said that this
doctrine of the Real Presence is not more inscrutable than many
mysteries of our faith, or indeed many things which are not
mysteries of faith. But it must be remembered that in the present
case the objection to the alleged mystery is, not that it is inscrut-
able, but that it is factitious, a creature of human speculation, the
* It is however high time for every one to ask himself what ho means by Tran-
substantiation. According to the view maintained with great ability by Mr. Cobb,
in the " Kiss of Peace," and " Sequel," " the common notions of Roman doctriue "
on this head are " utterly false," though not confined to the vulgar, but shared by
" many in positions of authority and influence, Archbishops and Bishops, Deans and
Archdeacons," who, "sad to think," "now, when at last our Church i3 beginning
to teach her members the doctrine of the Real Objective Presence" (I suppose
through divines of the school to which Mr. Cobb belongs, though I did not know
that they already constitute the Church), are " hindering the advance of truth," by
a "cruel" and " unjust" misrepresentation of the teaching of the Church of Rome,
which, as Mr. Cobb contends, is on this Article absolutely identical with that of the
Church of England. I believe that it is Mr. Cobb himself who is under a mistake
with regard to the doctrine of Transubstuntiation taught by the Church of Rome,
and I shall endeavour to show this in a note, which I must reservo for the App ndix.
2-j2
BISHOP THIRLTVALL's
product of an arbitrary and fanciful exegesis, disguised by an
accumulation of unmeaning or mutually contradictory terms. To
accept such a doctrine, is not bumility, but self-will.
Nature of Although the occasion for the appointment of the
inquiries of °
ComnS? Royal Commission on Ritual, arose out of a few ques-
Rrtuiu! tions connected with the administration of the Holy
Communion, which created an extraordinary agitation in the
Church, and possibly, but for that temporary excitement, or if the
judicial decision on the greater part of those questions had been
previously given, the Commission might not have been deemed
necessary, the range of inquiry assigned to it comprehended a very
much larger field, including the whole of the Rubrics and the
Lectionary. Few, I believe, who have applied any serious atten-
tion to the subject, and know how many important and difficult
questions it involves, in matters which have been the subject of
long and earnest controversy, will be surprised that the labours of
the Commission, though now in the third year of its sittings, have
not vet been brought to a close. It is not to be expected that the
final result should give universal satisfaction, even if there were
not persons who are opposed to all change in the matter, as hardly
any can be made which does not touch some debatable point.
Nevertheless I hope that the greater part will be generally
accepted as desirable.
Popular '^^ie orea^ question of Popular Education still awaits a
Education. soiuti0n, which all admit to be beset with difficulties,
and which some do not believe to be necessary, thinking that
nothing more is required than a development of the present
system, and that it could not be advantageously exchanged for
any other. Little fault indeed appears to be found with the
present system, except that there are large masses of our popula-
tion which it does not reach. The complaint that it forces the
poor man to accept as a succour of private charity, that which he
might rightfully claim as his due from the State, expresses what
I believe to be perfectly true in the abstract, but not, I think, any
thing that is commonly felt as a grievance by the poor. It
remains however to be seen, whether the object can be attained
CHARGES.
253
without powers of compulsion, which, however justifiable in theory,
are foreign to our national habits and modes of thinking, and can
at present only be regarded as a doubtful and hazardous experi-
ment. A well-considered scheme for supplying the inevitable
shortcomings of the present system, while leaving it in the main
untouched, would probably be generally hailed as a boon. But a
revolutionary measure, which would sacrifice what is by most
persons accounted most important in the quality of education, to
the extension of its area, would, I believe, be fraught with mani-
fold danger. And it is to be feared that it would not even be
attended with the advantage of that tranquillity which results from
uniformity, but that it would have the effect of dividing the
education of the country between Church Schools and State
Schools, and thus opening a perennial spring of discord and
strife.
But while I should deprecate any such sweeping change, I
think that the friends of Education ought not to rest
satisfied, as long as a large part of the children of the
State are left destitute of the elements of useful knowledge. The
truth on this head appears to me to have suffered from various
fallacies and exaggerations, which in the end must damage the
cause they are intended to serve.
None would deny that moral and religious training — where it
is successful — is infinitely more valuable than the mere
Importance
development of the intellect, and that the intellectual ^"i™1*
development affords no guarantee whatever for the forma- tiamujfcr"
tion of moral or religious habits. But it is no less certain that
intellectual vacuity, ignorance and stolidity, are no safeguard
against vice or crime. Unless they are so, every child h tlSj clS it
seems to me, as much right to such instruction as lifts him above
this brutish condition, and enables him to cultivate his natural
faculties, as he has to his daily bread. Nor do I find any reason
for believing that this instruction, though quite powerless to lay
any effectual restraint on the impulses of the animal instincts, or
to counteract the influence of bad example, is ever in itself other
than wholesome, if it be only as filling time which would be
254
BISHOP THIRLW ALL'S
wasted in baneful idleness, and occupying the mind during a part
of the day, with thoughts which afford it at least harmless
exercise. And I have yet to learn that this instruction is answer-
able for any of the offences which are rife among the lower classes.
The crimes which could not be perpetrated without the abuse of
some advantages of education, are those of persons moving on a
higher social level, most of whom have enjoyed not only intellec-
tual, but moral and religious training. It is not by the know-
ledge of reading, writing, or arithmetic, that the boy who falls
into bad company is enabled to become an expert thief, though
without that knowledge a clerk in a banking-house could not
commit a forgery.
Does merely I See a question asked, in a way which seems to imply
secular , . , „ ,
education that it is considered as a powerful argument, bearing on
crime t our own educational controversies : " Does the Common
School System prevent crime ? " * The Common Schools to
which it refers are those of the United States. Statistics and
authorities are produced to show that the working of the Common
Schools in America is very unsatisfactory, in fact, " a disastrous
failure," and that pious and good Americans are painfully sensible
of the evils which arise from the neglect of religious teaching.
But if we are to apply these facts to our own case, it would seem
that we ought also to ask, Does the Denominational System
prevent crime ? Or, if the question in this form should seem too
exacting, it might be : Does it prevent the increase of crime, or
sensibly lessen the number of youthful criminals ? A judicious
friend of the system would probably say that this was more than
could be reasonably expected ; that it is enough if its general
tendency is favourable to morality. But perhaps the same may
be true of the American Common School system ; and it remains
to be proved that it is responsible for the absence of religious
instruction, or that this might not be associated with it ; and that
the fault, if there is one, rests with the State, which offers the
benefit of secular instruction to all, and not with parents and
pastors who neglect the religious training of the young.
* Title of a pamphlet reprinted and published b)- the National Society.
CHARGES.
255
I also venture to think that the line commonly drawn between
secular and religious instruction is too sharp and tren- Secular ana
religioiiR
chant. I do not think that a school in which instruction instruction,
is confined to secular subjects is therefore necessarily irreligious.
I believe that it may be a school of morals as well as of learning,
acting upon the habits and character, by discipline, precept, and
example, and thus opening the way, and disposing the heart, for
an intelligent reception of religious truth. I attach much greater
importance to the tone, to the moral atmosphere of a school, than
to the nature of the things taught in it.* I also believe that
enormous exaggeration prevails as to the capacity of children,
especially of the poor, for the reception of theology ; and that
clergymen are very apt to deceive themselves as to the impression
made on the mind of a child, by incidental allusions to points of
doctrine, which they may find opportunity of dropping in the
course of lessons not expressly doctrinal or religious. It is only,
as far as I know, in schools for the poor, that this was ever con-
sidered as an important part of religious education. It seems to
imply a catechetical talent which probably few clergymen possess,
and fewer still have leisure to cultivate and exercise. Much less,
of course, is it to be expected in the schoolmaster, so that the
cases in which a school suffers any loss from the absence of such
opportunities, must be exceedingly rare and exceptional. As a
ground for any general school regulations, this consideration may
safely be left out of the account, and it is to be hoped will not
continue much longer to be urged as an objection to the Con-
science Clause, which, at least in its principle and spirit, may now
be considered as universally received.
I find my view of this subject confirmed by the experience
of her Majesty's Inspector of Schools in Mid Wales, in his Report
* Canon Norris ("The Education of the People") observes (p. 187), "Know-
ledge, even of the most sacred subjects, may be given to a child without any real
training of that child's character. The effect — religious or irreligious — of the
school lessons on a child's character, depends far more on the spirit in which they
are given than on the quantity of the directly religious instruction included in
them. I have been sometimes pained and shocked to find a school passing a really
admirable examination in what we call religious knowledge, when morally and
religiously the school was in an unsatisfactory state."
256
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
for 1868, which deserves very serious attention. His opinion
indeed is grounded on a state of things peculiar to Wales, but it
Report of involves principles of much larger application. In my
Inspector for r 1 J
Mid wales. last Charge I had occasion to observe, that I found no less
than 120 parishes in which it did not appear that any provision
had been made for the education of the poor through the instru-
Provisionfbr mentality of the Church. Mr. Pryce reports 92 parishes
education in
Wales. in the counties of Cardigan, Carmarthen, Pembroke, and
Radnor, with a population over 400, " containing no schools of
any description recognized by Government." He remarks that
very many of these are in remote and inaccessible places ; and
thinks it most desirable that proper Government schools should be
established in some of the most central of these neglected parishes.
But this could only be effected by a union which at present is
prevented by religious rivalry. Nothing indeed can be more
saddening than this rivalry,* whether we consider the waste of
means, the continual jealousy and heart-burning provoked by the
competition, or its effect on the instruction and discipline of the
contending schools. Yet so far as the scholars are concerned,
they are founded for precisely the same objects. The theological
differences which are the pretext for the separation, in themselves
little more than technical and professional, are to them absolutely
unintelligible. The chief outcome of the religious teaching
appears to be the fuel it ministers to self-conceit and evil tempers.
* The whole passage is worth transcribing. Speaking of two parishes in Car-
diganshire (p. 16), he says, " No sooner did one party determine upon having a
school, than the other party felt bound to start an opposition one ; and thus, while
many parishes in my district are without a school of any description, there are in
these villages too many schools. The natural consequence is, that such schools are
small and inferior. The two schools, the National and the British, work against
each other, and not against ignorance and indifference. In towns and parishes
where there is a fair population, this opposition and rivalry work beneficially, for
there is always plenty of raw material to act upon ; but in villages and parishes,
where the number of children who can possibly attend school within a radius of
three miles does not exceed 60 or 80, an increase in one school merely means a de-
crease in the other, one can only flourish at the expense of the other ; the object in
such places is not to get half a dozen poor children from the streets to attend some
school, but to entice half a dozen children from the National to the British School,
and vice versd. I need not point out what a bad effect all this has upon the discipline
and instruction in both schools."
CHARGES.
257
Casting about for a remedy to this state of things, Mr. Pryce is
led to the conclusion, that it is only to be found in the EstaUish-
establishment of secular schools in the strictest sense of secular
schools
the word for these small parishes. He believes that all proposed,
cause of religious jealousy having thus been removed, the clergy-
man would be allowed to retain the government of the school and
the appointment of the Master. He has no fear that "the cause
of religion or of the Established Church will suffer from " that
complete severance which he proposes to make between secular
and religious instruction. Indeed, under the circumstances which
he describes, it is scarcely possible that it should. For in his
district, the clergy, as he believes, have universally adopted the
principles of the Conscience Clause, so far even as often to exclude
doctrinal teaching from their schools altogether. But this
doctrinal teaching is apparently that which he elsewhere terms
distinctive religious leaching, relating to controverted points of
doctrine. He questions much — I think with good reason — that
the children derive much spiritual profit from the religious
instruction which they receive as part of the school work from
the acting teacher, an apprentice, or a monitor, even when the
character of the instruction reaches up to " good " and " fairly
good." If the purpose of such teaching is to make them better
Christians or better Churchmen, he thinks that it utterly fails ;
while there is reason to fear that it leads the clergyman to neglect
his own share in the work, which, but for this false semblance, he
would have felt it his duty to take entirely upon himself.
Whether this suggestion will be adopted by those who have
the power of carrying it into effect, I have no means of _ „
knowing. But the practical result which concerns toward"
ourselves, and depends entirely on our own will, seems schooIs-
very clear. Whether it be desirable or not that religious instruc-
tion should cease to form part even nominally of the prescribed
business of the day school, I think there can be no doubt that
you, my Beverend Brethren, are bound to act as if no such in-
struction was given ; as if it still rested wholly with yourselves,
whether the children of your parishes shall or shall not receive a
VOL. II. S
258
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
teaching, which with God's blessing will not fail to turn to their
spiritual profit, and to make them better Churchmen, but, above
all, better Christians. With regard to every one of them who is
committed to your care, from the moment that he is of age to
receive a lesson, if you take an interest in his welfare, you will
have a definite and simple object in view, towards which you will
direct all your efforts ; that is, to prepare him for admission into
the full privileges of the Church through the rite of Confirmation.
This preparation comprehends the whole body of Christian doc-
trine, so far as it is within the grasp of the child, the boy, the
youth, in the successive stages of his mental growth. This is a
part — it should be not the least interesting part — of your pastoral
work, with which no one has a right to interfere, and which you
should jealously reserve to yourselves, as you are alone responsible
for it. And where it happens that many of the lambs of your
flock have been drawn into other folds, as the labour of feeding
those which remain is proportionably lightened, the stronger is
their claim to the fullest measure of your care and diligence,
church ^ w^ ^a^e *kis occasion to say a word on another
£the*Dio-n subject of special interest to the Diocese. I am glad to
be able to report that the work of Church Restoration is
proceeding with unabated activity. In the Appendix to my last
Charge I enumerated thirty-five Churches which were in various
stages of progress. Of these twenty-three have since then been
completed, and fifteen have been added to the list ; most of them
very nearly ready for consecration or opening. Among those
which have been partial^ completed, three are objects of peculiar
interest : the Priory Church, Brecon ; the venerable Parish
Church of Llanbadarn Fawr (Aberystwyth), and the Cathedral of
TheCathe- ^e Diocese. It is to the Cathedral that I would now
draw your special attention. When we met last I was
able to congratulate you on the completion of the most important
— that is, immediately necessary — part of the work, the restora-
tion of the Tower. Since then, the most beautiful and archi-
tecturally interesting portion of the building, the eastern arm
with its aisles and other adjuncts, and a part of the nave, has been
CHARGES.
259
very nearly finished. But the work which remains to be done
includes by far the greater part of the nave and its aisles ; that is,
the part designed for the great mass of the congregation, which,
until this has been repaired, can derive no benefit from that
which has been already done. And we must remember that the
Cathedral is both the parish church and the only place of worship
for members of the Church of England within the parish. Con-
sidered in this light it has at least as strong a claim as any other
parish church. But it is also pronounced by Mr. Scott " the
most historical, the most nationally typical, the most beautiful,
and in every way the most valuable (of course in the architectural
point of view) ecclesiastical building in the Principality." And,
in fact, it has on this ground received contributions from
strangers, not all even members of our Church.
I am not surprised that its unfinished condition should appear
to Mr. Scott " a discredit to the Diocese and to "Wales." Its conditioa
I am well aware indeed of the circumstances, connected the Diocese
and to
with the absolutely unique peculiarity of its position, "Wales,
which renders the fact far less surprising than it is deplorable, and
which, as they have not arisen from any fault of ours, enable
us to witness the magnificent restoration of Llandaff Cathedral
with a pleasure, I will not say quite free from envy of advan-
tages which we do not possess, but unalloyed by any feeling
of shame or self-reproach for the past. On the other hand,
the present state of the work is, I think, in every point of
view, a motive which should urge us to a fresh and more vigorous
effort for the completion of the undertaking.
I may here add that after careful inquiry and consultation
with the Archdeacons, I found that the scheme of a Diocesan
Church Building Society did not commend itself to the judgment
of the great body of the clergy.
The meeting of Bishops of the Anglican Communion from all
parts of the world, assembled by our late Primate at The Pan-
Lambeth, ought not perhaps to be allowed to pass synodCan
wholly unnoticed. It left many agreeable recollections, but
not any monument of its presence which can be viewed with un-
s 2
260
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
mixed satisfaction, or, I think, any general wish for its return.
The best effect it produced, was perhaps the strengthening of a
brotherly feeling between the Churches of England and America.
Even if the assembled Bishops had really represented their several
Dioceses, so as to be able to express more than their individual
views and wishes, the wide differences in their conditions, with
regard to their relations to the State, would, I believe, have pre-
vented the possibility of any practical result. Some, however, of
the Resolutions adopted by the Committees appointed by the
Meeting, may possibly germinate in measures useful to the
Proposition Colonial Churches. But they included a scheme for
for a volun- , . . . .
tary^piri- "the constitution of a voluntary spiritual tribunal, to
bunai. which questions of doctrine may be carried by appeal
from each province of the Colonial Church," which, if not impor-
tant, is at least significant. It lays down the principle that, " as
it is a Tribunal for decisions in matters of faith, Archbishops and
Bishops only should be judges." This tacit condemnation of our
present Court of Appeal, no doubt expresses the views of an active
party in the Church. But unless those views should become
predominant, the principle would not, I believe, be generally
accepted under any circumstances in which our Church will ever
be placed.
I pass to another topic, and one of immeasurably great im-
portance.
The convocation of a Council of the whole Roman Catholic
episcopate, and styled (Ecumenical, to be held at Borne under the
Convocation presidency of the Pope himself, is an event which we
of a so-called . . . . .„
cEcumenicai could hardiv under any circumstances view 'With ind.ii-
Council at "
Rome. ference, or with no feeling stronger than mere curiosity,
as wholly foreign to our own concerns. A movement which affects
the condition of the largest part of Christendom, can never be
absolutely without influence on our own. But the present state
of our Church affords some special motives, which oblige us to
watch the progress and results of this movement with lively interest
and earnest attention. It is not only the manifestation of a
leaning to Romanism, which we have been witnessing of late years
CHARGES.
261
among members of our own communion, nor even the desire of
reunion with Rome, which has been expressed by some whom we
cannot doubt to be still sincerely attached to the principles of the
Reformation ; but it is that voices have been heard among us,
claiming our sympathy for the coming Council, and treating it as
matter of surprise and regret, that no overtures have been made
on the part of the Anglican episcopate, for some kind of participa-
tion in its proceedings. *
No doubt the most rigid severity of Protestant principles would
not prevent us from earnestly desiring that the deliberations of the
Council may be overruled for a good end. And until lately it was
possible for an eager partisan of reunion to maintain that we had
been churlishly disregarding a kind and courteous invitation.
That delusion has been dispelled by the highest authority, t The
Church of Rome has never recognised the existence of a The Angii-
true episcopate in the Anglican Church, and therefore pate not
° recognised
the Pope could not include its Bishops in his general b? Kome-
invitation, and could only comprehend them under the description
of Protestants. + And all that he addressed to them in that
* "A Few Words on Reunion and the Coming Council at Rome." By Gerard
F. Cobb, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. An antidote to this pam-
pblet, sufficient, I believe, for every mind still open to conviction, and not incapable
of discerning truth, will be found in Janus.
t Though the Pope's letter to Archbishop Manning, the original of which is to
ba found in the Times of October 5, was designed as a reply to Dr. Cumming's
inquir3', it could not have been more to the purpose, if it had been written to
undeceive Mr. Cobb and his readers. Mr. Cobb assured them (p. 25), as of some-
thing "quite certain," that "the Roman authorities are ready to make very large
concessions to the separated bodies." The Pope — who should, at least, be one of
those authorities — thinks that a little consideration would have enabled Dr.
Gumming at once to " perceive that no room can be given at the Council for the
defence of errors which have already been condemned, and that we could not have
invited non-Catholics to a discussion, but have only urged them to avail themselves
of the opportunity afforded by this Council,"— for what ? for " returning to the
Father, from whom they have long unhappily gone astray." This is perfectly
candid and outspoken, but it is not Mr. Cobb's programme.
X " The Apostolic See charges those who call themselves the Archbishops and
Bishops of the Church established in England and Ireland with being intruders, by
favour of the civil power, into the Sees of these realms : inasmuch as they and
their predecessors took possession thereof in spite and to the detriment of the patri-
archal rights of that See, which from the canons and immemorial usage had been
exercised in the nomination or approbation of all Metropolitans and Bishops." Dr.
Wiseman (afterwards Cardinal) in Palmer's " Jurisdiction of the British Epis-
262
BISHOP THIELWALL's
character, was an exhortation to submission. I am not saying
this in the way of complaint or reproach. We have rather reason
to be thankful that he acknowledges our right to the name of
Christians, which is so often denied us in Roman Catholic
countries by persons not wholly uneducated. * But it is desirable
that every one should clearly understand the terms on which alone
any overture on our part could be received. And the language of
the exhortation itself shows that we are considered at Rome, not
only as heretics, but as very obstinate and perverse heretics, sin-
Regarded as ning against light and knowledge, denying truths which
do not admit of dispute, such as the Pope's Divine right
to the government of the Universal Church, t It was not to be
expected that the Pope should be conversant with the writings of
our Divines. But how broad an intellectual gulf is disclosed by
this language, between a person capable of making such a mistake,
and those who know the real state of the case. But at the same
time the Pope very clearly stated the point which he most truly
calls the hinge + upon which the whole question between Eoman
Catholics and all who dissent from them turns. It is that " the
The primacy primacy, both of honour and jurisdiction, conferred upon
of st Peter. pef.er amj j^s successors by the Founder of the Church,
is placed beyond the hazard of disputation." § This indeed makes
it very difficult to understand the position of persons, who, still
copacy Vindicated." Mr. Cobb indeed (p. 21) has a correspondent, whom he
describes as "an eminent Eoman Catholic theologian," who wrote to him, "If
your Bishops believe themselves to be Bishops, the}- ought to go to the Council ; if
they do not go, it will be tantamount to an implicit acknowledgment on their part
that they are not Bishops at all." If this is a fair sample of the intelligence or
the candour of Mr. Cobb's Eoman Catholic friends, we cannot receive their state-
ments with too much mistrust.
* I speak in part from personal recollection. (See my Charge of 1866, p. 39,
note.) In the Eeport of the Anglo-Continental Society for 1866, p. 8, a clergyman
writes from Boulogne : " Not so very long ago, while some children were playing
close by one of our churches here, one asked the other what building it was.
Imagine the reply, ' C'est le temple des paiens.' " The spring of this general
ignorance (illustrated by Mr. Cobb, p. 67) is wilful misrepresentation.
t " Diximus extra disputationis aleam constitutum esse primatum, non honoris tan-
turn sedet jurisdictionis, Petro ejusque successoribus ab Ecclesiaa institutore collatura.
J " In hoc nimirum cardine tota qusstio versatur inter Catholicos et disseutientes
quoscunque."
§ Compare Acts xix. 35, 36.
CHARGES.
263
remaining in the visible communion of our Church, nevertheless
not only avowedly hold all Roman doctrine, but acknowledge the
infallibility of the Church which one of our Articles declares to
have " erred in matters of faith," while others expose the par-
ticular errors into which she has fallen. They profess to believe
that the two Churches are kept apart, not by any essential differ-
ences, but only by a misunderstanding, which might be cleared
up by friendly explanations. * Those who use such language seem
to overlook both their own position and that of the person with
whom they wotild have to deal in any attempt at reunion. The
difficulty is not only that the party or school to which they
belong, neither has nor is likely ever to have authority to
represent the Church of England ; but it is that the Pope
cannot admit that there has ever been any error or misunder-
standing on his part, either as to his own doctrine or ours,
though he may readily admit that there has been such on our part
as to both.
An opinion has been expressed by a dignitary of our Church,
that in this question of reunion a great deal depends Reunion not
upon the personal character and inclination of the Pope.f on the incli-
, m nation of the
This appears to me a sheer mistake. It is true that p°Pe-
in the administration of the laws of his Church, in the exercise of
his prerogative of dispensation, in the enforcing or relaxation of
discipline, his power is almost unlimited, and in the course of this
century has been carried to a length beyond all previous pre-
cedent. £ But with regard to doctrine, he is not so much a person
as an institution and a system. His personal character and ability
may enable him to carry out the system with which he is iden-
tified into fresh developments. But he is utterly powerless to
introduce any change which would involve an admission of the
smallest dogmatical error ; though indeed where infallibility is
* Mr. Cobb, p. 6, and passim.
f A letter to his Holiness Pius IX. from William Selwyn, Canon of Ely Cathe-
dral. At p. 16 we read, "Holy Father, . . . upon you, more than on any other
human being, rests at this moment the hope of peace and unity for the family of
Christ on earth."
X I allude to the dealing of Pius VII. with the Gallican Episcopate.
264
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
concerned, there can be no distinction between great and small. *
The smallest is just as fatal to the claim as the greatest.
What strikes me as most surprising is, that the assembling of
the Council should have appeared to any one in the light of an
opportunity for an approach toward reconciliation. The Pope
indeed is consistent enough from his own point of view. He
considers the great number of Bishops whom he is able to bring
vitality of together, as a proof of the "close unity and invincible
Church. vitality " of his Church, which he hopes will make a
deep impression on Protestant minds, t And undoubtedly it does
prove the compact organization of the Papal Church, though it is
not so evident that such unity is a surer sign of vitality in a
religious body than in a Byzantine despotism. But, at least, the
action of the Council will be a more convincing sign of vitality
than its mere coming together. But for all friends of union who
have not made up their minds beforehand to accept whatever the
Council may decree, it would seem that the plainest dictates of
common prudence require that they should defer their adhesion,
until it is known how its proceedings affect the condition of the
Roman Catholic Church, and consequently our position with
regard to it.
But though I do not look on the convocation of the Boman
Council as an opportunity of action for those who are outside the
Church of Rome, I think it is an occasion which may most fitly
be allowed to lead our thoughts to dwell on the history of that
* Nor, it may be added (with reference to language of Canon Selwyn, reported
by Mr. Cobb, p. 42), between far and near in an approach to unity which fails to
reach it.
t So the Council of Trent (Sessio xii. caput v.) assigns, as one of the reasons for
the celebration of the Festival of Corpus Christi, the effect it must produce on the
minds of heretics : " Sic quidem oportuit victriccm veritatem de mendacio et hasresi
triumphum agere ; ut ejus adversarii in conspectu tanti splendoris (of so many
lights and of so much brocade) et in tanta universse Ecclesia? lajtitia posiii, vel
debilitati et fracti tabcscant, vel pudore affecti et confusi aliquando resipiscant." It
was thought that, however they might be proof against all the arguments of the
theologians, the spectacle of a magnificent procession must be irresistible. The
avowal is one of singular naivete, but the calculation is well grounded in the
weak side of human nature. The attraction of a sensuous worship is always
strong in proportion to the decay of spiritual life and the absence of rational
conviction.
CHARGES.
265
Church in the period subsequent to the Reformation, and espe-
cially on the transactions of its last general Council. It was the
Council of Trent that made the Church of Some what it is.
Such as it then became, it has remained ever since ; with great
changes indeed in its outward condition, but with few
° The Council
affecting its inward character. I know of no subject of ™ toestady
study which I would more earnestly recommend to all tory'ofthe
who wish to form a well grounded opinion on those pros- church,
pects of union which are now held out to us, than the acts and the
history of the Council of Trent. Not the acts alone ; though I
venture to think there are few minds in which a comparison of
the Canons of Trent with our Articles, could leave a doubt as to
the futility of every attempt to reconcile them with one another ;
not the acts alone, but also the history, which shows how they
were brought about, — by what worldly intrigues and Lessons
derivable
unholy motives. This study would enable every one to from it.
judge of its claim, I will not say to infallibility, but to confi-
dence and respect ; * to satisfy himself whether there is any appear-
* The history of the Council of Trent is, in one sense, very well known, in
another very little known. There is no portion of modern history for the study of
which there is a greater abundance of trustworthy evidence ; but it is very little
studied and actually known. In our language I am not aware that there is any
good or tolerably readable History of the Council. It is much to be desired that
some one would translate Bungener's " Histoire du Concile de Trente," 2me ed.
1854. The nimbus which, in the course of three centuries, with the help of
Jesuitical manipulation of history, has gathered round the Council, would have
surprised contemporaries who saw behind the scenes. It was a Cardinal (Gieseler,
Lehrbuch dcr neueren K. G. p. 505) who wrote of it —
" Namque inter istoa ut fatear patres
Unum notari posse vel alteruin
Quem conferas illis bcati
Tempora quos aluore secli,
Totius at pars concilii quota est,
Qua; recta spectet."
Nargas (a member of the Imperial Embassy at the Council) wrote, " Les paroles
et les remontrances sont fort inutiles ici. Je crois qu'ellos ne le sont pas moins a
Rome. Ce sont des aveugles. lis ont pris une ferme resolution de ne penser qu'aux
interets de la chair et du monde. Le Concile ne peut rien faire de lui-meme. Le
Legat est le maitre, il tient tout dans sa main. Apres cela on ne doit plus s'etonner
de rien." Ibid. p. 522. "Isidore Chiari, Bishop of Eoligno, who had opportunities
at Trent of becoming thoroughly acquainted with his Episcopal colleagues, says, that
in Italy, among 250 Bishops, one could scarcely find four who even deserved the
name of spiritual shepherds, and really exercised their pastoral office." Janus, p, 356.
266
BISHOP THIRLWALI/S
ance to render it credible, that the spirit by which its counsels
were guided, was one of truth, or of holiness, or of charity, and
not one of an opposite nature. By this we should learn rightly
to appreciate the merit and the value of the reforms which are
represented by Roman Catholic writers, and now by some of our
own, * as having removed all reasonable ground of offence, and as
having deprived us of the right of claiming the title of a Re-
formed Church, in contradistinction to the Church of Rome. We
should see how many of those which were extorted from the Court
of Rome by the cry of the nations still acknowledging its rule,
were reforms only on paper ; how far any of them was from touch-
ing any profitable abuse or superstition ; how many served only to
extend the Papal prerogative, by opening a new field for the
exercise of the dispensing power. It would not be necessary for
the purpose of this inquiry to enter into the labyrinth of disputed
details. The broad facts which stand out in the clearest light,
furnish sufficient ground for a certain conclusion. And there are
Two promi- two which are patent and conspicuous above all others ;
nen cts. on ^e one ]ian(Jj the steady resistance to every demand
which tended either to limit the plenitude of Papal authority, or
to close any source of revenue to the Court of Rome ; on the other
hand, the consistent endeavour to widen the doctrinal breach
between Rome and the German Protestants, and to engage the
Roman Catholic princes in a crusade against them. This is not
indeed an excuse for its doctrinal innovations ; but it is the only
explanation by which many of them can be defended from the
charge of being merely wanton and capricious. In no part of its
proceedings is this more clearly apparent than in its treatment of
Holy Scripture ; not merely in the disciplinary regulations which
were intended to keep it a sealed book, but in the parity of rank
assigned to tradition, and in the assertion of the Canonicity of the
Apocryphal books, and of the authenticity of the Vulgate. I
advert to these examples for the sake of a more general remark.
I observed that in matters of doctrine the Head of the Roman
Church is not a free agent. Nothing depends on his individual
' Mr. Cobb, u. e. p. G8.
CHARGES.
267
will and pleasure. He cannot make the smallest concession. He
cannot reopen the discussion of a question which has been deter-
mined by the vote of the majority in a General Council. That is
the fatal unhappiness of his position. But there is on the other
side a counter-impossibility with regard to matters of fact. In
such questions nothing depends upon the will. Men MatterBof
cannot change their convictions in these matters, unless Indent on
constrained by the force of evidence, and it must be thewm-
remembered that facts of history and of grammar are susceptible
of as complete certainty as facts of astronomy or arithmetic. No
effort of Galileo's will could have enabled him to disbelieve the
motion of the earth. The power of the Inquisition might have
prevented him from learning the truth ; it did force him to deny
it ; but it could not alter his inward conviction of the fact. As
little could the authority of a Council, though composed not
merely, as at Trent, of two or three score, * but of a thousand
bishops, enable a scholar to accept that which he knows to be a
mistranslation as a true rendering. Yet this is what is required of
him, when he is called upon to recognise the Vulgate as authentic
Scripture, t Still less can it do that which exceeds the power of
* Lainez, the General of the Jesuits, urged the fact, that under Paul III., articles
of the first importance (principalissimi articoli) concerning the Canonical Books,
interpretation of Scripture, parity of Tradition and Scripture, had been defined by
less than fifty voices — as a proof that the authority of these decrees was derived
entirely from the Pope, as a Council is General only because the Pope gives it that
title, which ho may do, however small its number. (Siccome un nuinero di Prelati
dal Pontcfice congregati per far Concilio Generale sia quanto picciolo si vuole,
non d' altronde ha il nomc e l'efficazia d' esser generale, se non perche il Papa
gliela da, cosi anchc non ha d' altrove l'authorita.) Sarpi, vii. 20.
t Some later apologists of the Council have endeavoured to restrict the sense of
the word " authentic," so as only to exclude any error affecting faith or morals.
Put this is an interpretation not warranted either by the terms of the Decree, or by
the discussion of it in the Council. The most liberal construction thero put upon
the word (that of Vega, Sarpi, ii. 51) only admitted the possibility of such de-
parture from the sense of the original, as is inevitable in a translation. Pallavicino
himself (vi. 17) knows only of two discordant opinions on the subject : one, that of
the theologians who maintained the perfect exactness of the Vulgate ; the other,
that of those who interpret the Decree less rigidly, but hold that the translation is
free, not only from errors pertaining to faith and morals, but also from even the
slightest patent unconformity with the original text (apcrta difformita. ne pur
minima dal testo). One of the more sensible speakers thought that the translation
should have been examined before its correctness was guaranteed. Others argued
that, although the translator was not inspired, since the Council was, its approval
268
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
Omnipotence itself; abolish a historical fact, undo the past, make
it not to have been. Yet this is what was attempted by the
Council of Trent, when it decreed the canonicity of the Apocrypha,
not merely inserting them for the first time in the canon — which
would only have been a scandalous abuse — but declaring that they
had always formed part of it, which was notoriously untrue.
When men not ignorant of history are invited to believe this as a
fact of the past, they too must plead, non possumus. It is in vain
for them that a Council stakes its infallibility on a proposition
which they know to be false, with as full assurance as they have
of their own existence. A thousand echoes cannot change false-
hood into truth. When two such impossibilities come into conflict
with one another, compromise and conciliation may well seem
hopeless. There is however this difference between the two cases.
The one impossibility is a fact in the divinely ordered constitution
of the human mind ; the other has no basis in the real nature of
things, and is indeed nothing more than an arbitrary inference
from most doubtful premisses, grasped with a tenacity propor-
tioned to its intrinsic weakness. This last is indeed the only part
of the case which seems to me to open a door for a single ray of
rational hope.
How fax the But discouraging, with regard to the prospect of
Church has reunion, as is the aspect presented by the Papal Church,
since°the when it emerges from the Council of Trent, with its new
Council of
Trent. Canons, Creed, and Catechism, and its old maxims of
exterminating persecution sharpened for new excesses, we must
not forget that three centuries have elapsed since the close of that
Council, and that in the course of this period some of the most
momentous changes recorded in the history of mankind have
passed on the face of European society, and on the inner current
of thought and feeling. It was probable, a priori, that the Church
and anathema against all who do not receive the translation, would have the effect of
making it free from error (quando sara approvata la volgata edizione, e fulminato
l'anathema contra chi non la riceve, quclla sara senza errori, non per spirito di chi la
scrisse, ma dello Sinodo che per tale 1' ha ricevuta. Sarpi, u. s.). This to us sounds
ludicrous, but does not seem to have been thought absurd in the Council. It is
perhaps only a somewhat strong example of that disregard of historical truth which
pervades Romish controversial theology.
CHARGES.
269
of Rome should feel the influence of these changes. It was
impossible that it should not be more or less beneficially affected
by the vicinity of Protestant populations, wherever the two com-
munions were found side by side. Let us not deny that, through
the concurrence of these causes, considerable improvements have
taken place in the state of the Church of Rome. There has been
a notable amendment in the general character of the ,
° Amendment
persons who have filled the Papal Chair. The last who character of
created any very grave scandal, was the Pope who Popes-
assembled the Council, and directed its earlier proceedings !*
Since then their lives have mostly been at least decorous and
respectable. In France, and in the parts of Europe which were
swept by the torrent of the French Revolution, the clergy was to
some extent purified and strengthened by suffering. The post-
Tridentine monastic institutions were distinguished from those of
the Middle Ages by a character of practical usefulness, and by
works of mercy, with which Protestants can fully sympathize,
and which should inspire them with a holy emulation ; though
they may well be content to do the same things in a more simple
and unostentatious way.
But the question which we have now before us is, whether
whatever movement has been called forth during this period
in the Church of Rome, bas tended to narrow or to
Has the
widen the breach between us, to make reunion more or reSonb0-
less hopeful? It might have happened that, without or?eessmore
any formal abandonment of its outward position, a new hopefuI '
spirit might have begun to breathe through the Church of Rome,
affording some encouragement to those who yearn for the restora-
tion of unity. Unhappily it is impossible to mistake the direction
which the movement has really taken, the spirit by which it has
been impelled, and not to see that it has parted the two commu-
nions more widely than ever asunder. The reign of the Pope
* Paul III., while professing his desire for the reformation of the Church, raised
two boys, one of 16, the other of 14, children of his illegitimate offspring, to the
dignity of Cardinals. Sarpi observes (1. c. 52) that this immediately 'dispelled
the fear which some of the Cardinals had conceived, of a reform in their own
body.
270
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
who is now exhorting us to throw ourselves at his feet, has been
marked by a series of measures, perhaps more repugnant to our
deepest convictions than those of any of his predecessors since the
Reformation. He appears to have kept three objects steadily in
view : the exaltation of the Papal supremacy, and more complete
concentration of the Church in his own person ;* the accumulation
of new honours, as they are supposed to be, on the Virgin Mary ;
and lastly, the subjugation of the whole domain of human thought
under his control, and the establishment of a theocracy, in which
the most extravagant pretensions of Boniface VIII. should pass
into a Law of the Church and an Article of Faith. In the
Definition of memoraDle Definition of the Immaculate Conception, he
cuiatemcon- may ^e sa^ virtually to have combined all these objects.
The utterly unpractical, frivolous character of the scho-
lastic subtlety thus exalted into a dogma, has very generally
diverted attention from much that it involves, besides its unsound,
anti-scriptural theology. It is also perhaps the most violent
strain of papal prerogative, and the most audacious perversion of
historical truth, to be found in history. For the Church of
Rome disclaims the power of decreeing any new Article of Faith,
and thus is compelled to assert that whatever it defines was from
the beginning the doctrine of the Church.f But this assertion
subjects the dogma to the test, not only of reason or of Scripture,
but of history. It thus becomes one of those questions of fact, in
which, when the evidence is sufficiently clear, men have not the
power of rejecting it. For all who have any sense of historical
truth, this dogma alone would constitute an insurmountable
barrier, which, as long as it lasts — and it cannot be removed
without an admission of error — must prevent them from acknow-
ledging an authority which lays such a burden on their con-
sciences.
It would perhaps be unjust to charge the present Pope with
a more determined hostility to religious liberty, toleration,
* It is the application of the famous word of Louis XIV*. to the Church —
L'Eglise, c'est moi.
f Bishop Dupanloup, " Lettre sur le Futur Concile CEcumenique," p. 12. "On
ne lait pas le dogme dans les Conciles, mais on le constate."
CHARGES.
271
freedom of conscience in thought and speech, in a word, to all the
principles and institutions which are regarded, not by Hostility of
Protestants only, but by some of the most devout members reu^us to
of his own communion and even of his clergy, as toleration,
the most precious fruits of social progress, than has
been uniformly manifested by his predecessors. But it is certain
that none of them ever gave more decided and emphatic utterance
to those views. And it was therefore not unreasonably believed
by those who are most deeply concerned in the event, that he
would not be satisfied with having stamped them with the sanction
of his personal authority, but that one of the main ends for which
he convoked the Council was to transform his political doctrines
into religious dogmas and terms of salvation, so as to place some
of the noblest spirits of the age, who are at the same time among
the most faithful adherents of his Church, under the cruel neces-
sity of choosing between their spiritual allegiance and principles
dearer to them than their lives. It is while men like Montalem-
bert are looking forward to the Council with grief and dismay,
that we are exhorted by members and ministers of our own
Church, to hail it with joy and hope.
I can find but one excuse for this, as it seems to me, prodigious
obliquity of spiritual vision. The Pope has described 0bject of
the supreme object of the Council as twofold : to remedy the Counoil-
evils and avert dangers which threaten the foundations of religion
on the one hand, and of civil society on the other. We cannot
deny the existence of such evils and dangers; and at such a
juncture we would not raise the question how far the Papal
Church is answerable for them.* The object is one with which,
as Christians and as men, we must heartily sympathize. But our
approval of the end cannot make us indifferent to the means by
* Father Hyacinthe however does not hesitate to express " his most profound
conviction, that if France in particular, and the Latin races in general, are given up
to social, moral, and religious anarchy, the chief cause lies, not indeed in Catholic-
ism itself, but in the manner in which Catholicism has been long understood and
practised." " Ma conviction la plus profonde est que, si la France en particulier et
les races latines en general sont livrees a l'anarchie sociale, morale et religieuse, la
cause principalo en est, non pas, sans doute, dans le Catholicisme lui-mome,
mais dans la maniere dont le Catholicisme est depuis longtemps compris et pratique."
272
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
which it is to be reached. It cannot relieve us from the duty of
inquiring whether they are legitimate in themselves, and whether
they are well adapted to the attainment of the object. I waive
the preliminary doubt, whether the persons to be assembled at
Rome — however otherwise respectable — are likely to be the best
qualified, by their education and habits of thought, for the treat-
ment either of philosophical questions, or of subjects which fall
within the province of a Congress of Social Science. But we are
How far it able to iudge whether anv of the measures hitherto
will be .
carried out. announced as designed to occupy their deliberations,
warrant an expectation that they will lead to the desired result,
and not much more probably to one of an exactly opposite kind.
That a time so pregnant, in the view of the Pope himself, with
changes affecting the very basis of religion and society, when
social problems of the most awful moment are weighing upon all
earnest minds, should have been selected as the right season for
pledging the Church to a fable extracted from the legendary his-
tory of the Virgin Mary, might have seemed incredible, if it had
not been in sad accordance with the past, and especially with the
history and character of the present Pope. It will probably
disgust not a few intelligent Roman Catholics, as well as Protes-
tants who are not pledged to accept all the decrees of the Council.
Feelings of still deeper indignation have been excited by the
pretensions which, if admitted, would establish a theocracy in
every Roman Catholic State. The Governments whose rights
are threatened, look on, some with anxiety, others with contempt,
all with the firm resolution to resist this invasion. It remains to
be seen whether the influence of religion or the security of social
order will be promoted by the struggle which it will provoke, or
by the new element of chronic discord which it will introduce
into every European State.
Verily the Seven Hills are not those to which we can lift up our
eyes in the belief that from them cometh our help.
The proceedings of the unhappy Council of Trent were fitly closed
by a series of acclamations, which have been duly recorded for
perpetual memory with the rest of its acts. The last, pronounced
CHARGES.
273
by the sanguinary Cardinal of Lorraine, was " Anathema to all
joy and solemn thanksgiving to the Almighty. * To
renew such scenes is no doubt out of the power, and, I would fain
abandonment of the principle of persecution, as a religious duty,
wherever it appears to be expedient, or the slightest mitigation of
Rome, to associate with the name of heretic, we have no reason to
suppose. On the contrary, one of the doctrines proclaimed
indirectly in the Syllabus, by the condemnation of the opposite
opinion, and which is expected to be defined by the Council, is the
external coercive jurisdiction of the Church to inflict temporal
penalties on dissentients. And these penalties have been authori-
tatively explained as including fines, imprisonment, and scow ging,
without prejudice to the Church's right to take stronger measures
if they should appear necessary, f
* In the interval, S. Pius V. — the only Tope hitherto canonized since the
Reformation — had enjoined his general to give no quarter to heretics (an order not
issued against the Turks at Lepanto). It may ho asked, why revive these painful
memories ? It is because they are only to a very small extent things of the past.
The form only is changed, the spirit remains the same. In the words of the
Genevese pastors, speaking of the Pope's address to Protestants, "La forme de cet
ei rit, moderee, charitable, ne rappelle pas les anathcmes dont Rome nous a tant ue
fois charges. Malheureusement, les anathcmes subsistcnt. lis n'ont jamais ete
revoques. lis servent de texte a ce qu'on enseigne aux populations Catholiques sur
les Reformateurs, la Reforme et les Reformes : ils inspiient les lois et les mesuros
dont nos freres sont l'objet partout oil l'Eglise Romaine impose aux gouvernemcnts
ses volontes." And therefore the truth is needed as a balance to misrepresentations
now industriously circulated among us in the interest of Rome.
f "They are greatly mistaken who suppose that the Biblical and old Christian
spirit has prevailed in the Church over the mediaeval notion of her being an
institution with coercive power to imprison, hang, and burn. On the contrary,
these doctrines are to receive fresh sanction from a General Council, and that pet
theory of the Popes — that they could force kings and magistrates, by excommunica-
tion aDd its consequences, to carry out I heir sentences of confiscation, imprisonment,
and death — is now to become an infallible dogma. It follows that not only is the
old institution of the Inquisition justified, but it is recommended as an urgent
of Trent.
the feeling which it has been the policy, as well as the instinct of
vol.. ii.
i
274
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
Under that anathema we must be content to live, until it is
moved by an authority equal to that which laid it on us. Our
Ourconsoia- consolation is that we can say, " Though they curse, yet
Anathema. bless Thou ; " and with the fullest conviction that the
Divine Blessing on the cause of Truth and Righteousness will not
be intercepted by the fiercest cursings of fallible, presumptuous,
unrighteous judges.
I have dwelt on this topic longer than I had intended, but not,
I venture to think, without a cause. I hasten to conclude ; and
I am reminded of the question with which I began : " What can
the righteous man do ? " None of us, my brethren, it is to be
hoped, could hear these words with any such thought as that of
applying them to himself as a description of his own character, and
nothing could be more foreign to my purpose in all that I have
been just now saying, than that our Church should take up an
attitude of Pharisaical self-complacency over against the
The spirit in 1 , ' °
which we Church of Rome. The deepest humility and the largest
should con- r j a
p™^atetne charity are perfectly consistent with the clearest percep-
tion of the breadth and depth of the gulf which separates
the two Churches from one another. We ought not to think that
the errors into which the Papal Church has fallen, entirely
neutralize the benefit of the truths which it has preserved. The
latter half of the creed of Pius IV. contains a series of erroneous
novelties, which it is impossible for us to accept, even without the
monstrous addition since made to them. But it also includes the
Nicene Creed ; and this is not the less a bond of spiritual union,
because the new articles appended to it are a bar to visible unity.
The Church of Pome ministers the bread of life, adulterated indeed
by many heterogeneous and unwholesome ingredients ; but they
are not sufficient to deprive it of all its nutritive virtue. Still the
fullest acknowledgment of this truth, to the utmost extent of its
application, need not and ought not in the slightest degree to
weaken our assurance of the strength of our position, in all the
necessity of the present age. The Civiltd has long since described it as 'a
sublime spectacle of social perfection ;' and the two recent canonizations and
beatifications of inquisitors, following in rapid succession, gain in this connexion a
new and remarkable significance." Janus, p. 12.
CHARGES.
275
points on which we are at variance with Rome, or our conviction
that so far our cause is the cause of truth and righteousness.
The question then recurs : having this consciousness, What
can we do ? I quite agree with those who hold, though The duty of
. Churchmen
from a different point of view, that we have a duty respecting
i 7 J the Coun-
to discharge toward the approaching council. It would cU-
clearly be wrong to look on it with contemptuous indifference. It
is indeed the height of rashness and presumption to interpret any
promise made by our Lord to His Church, as a guarantee which
excludes the temporary prevalence either of error in doctrine or of
viciousness in life.* But there is nothing in the experience which
refutes that interpretation, to forbid the hope or the prayer, that
the Church of Rome may yet come to her right mind, or that
the proceedings which betoken a disposition to perpetuate and
aggravate the evil, may be overruled into an instrument which
* Mr. Cobb (p. 54) reproduces the old Romish sophism, apparently without any
misgiving. He thinks that " no more terrible defent from the gates of hell could bo
imagined than is involved" in the failure of our Lord's promise (Matt. xvi. 18)
inlerpreted in the Romish sense. "Conceive," he says, "the total shipwreck of all
faith among the one hundred and sixty millions in communion with the Holy See
which would ensue, were a Council of Reunited Christendom to decree that even
one single doctrine which they and their forefathers for thirteen generations of men
have (on the strength of Roman Decrees) held to be part of the infallible Word of
God, was after all a mere human invention." It must be observed, that the
promise could not, by the mere force of the word prevail, preclude a temporary
prevalence of the Gates of Hell, as Amalek prevailed against Israel, though finally
discomfited. Again, the Gates of Hell were certainly prevailing against the Church,
when the Papal Chair was filled by men of evil and scandalous lives. They were
prevailing in the enormities of the Avignon Papacy, and in the Great Schism. And
the moral damage they then inflicted was irreparable, whereas an error in doctrine
may be coirected, and may do little harm to any one while it lasts. If the Decree
of the Immaculate Conception was to be rescinded by a Council of Reunited
Christendom, the "millions in communion with Rome" would, it is to be hoped, be
brought into the state of those who now both l eject that Decree, and believe that
the mooting of such a question, no more concerning the Church than a theory of
the moon, was a sin which proved the ascendancy of the Power of Darkness. But
it is rather too much to expect those who take this view of the subject, to admit that
it involves a " total shipwreck of all faith." On the contrary, they believe that its
universal reception would be an unspeakable blessing to the Church. The handling
of the text adopted by Mr. Cobb, is characteristic of the license with which Romish
theologians, but especially the Popes, as if it was a privilege of their office,
habitually wrest Scripture to their own purposes. The interpretation is so purely
arbitrary and subjective, that, to serve as an argument, it needs the assumption of
the thing it is designed to prove. Relief in the infallibility of the Pope, will always
turn out to be at bottom nothing but the believer's faith in his own.
T 2
27G
LI SHOP THIKLWALl/s
may hasten its removal. I will riot say whether our Church, so far
as it was represented at the Lambeth conference, has sufficiently
discharged its duty in this respect, by the clause in its "Address
to the faithful in Christ Jesus," which refers to " the pretension
to universal sovereignty over God's heritage asserted for the See
of Rome." It may be that the occasion may call for some more
distinct protest against the Papal usurpation, and the authority of
the Council which is to give it further sanction and larger extent.
But the greatest breach of charitv which either the
Recognition 0 ■»
authorit?*1 Church or any of its members could commit, would be
deprecated. any jj^^ 0f overture which might be construed into
acquiescence in that usurpation, and recognition of that authority.
It would, I believe, so far make us accomplices in a conspiracy
against the most sacred rights of mankind.* And we shall but
very imperfectly appreciate the importance of the issue, and the
tearfulness of the danger with which Christendom is threatened,
unless we bear in mind that the question is not simply, where this
power, so little short of omnipotence, is to be lodged, but by whom
it is to be wielded. Nominally it will be by the Pope, but really
by those who have his ear. And who will they be but the here-
ditary sworn ministers and advisers of the Holy See ? The
He-iimean- infallibilitv of the Pope means the sovereigntv of the
ing of Tapal
infallibility. Jesuits. The Pope — however ignorant and imbecile —
will reign ; the Jesuits will govern. And the question, most
deeply interesting indeed to every sincere Roman Catholic, but
very far from a matter of indifference to us, is whether for the
future the Jesuits are to be absolute lords of the Church of Rome,
and to have all its machinery and resources at their disposal. But
among those who are engaged in this undertaking, there is no one
who seems to me entitled to larger allowance, than the personage
* I might use much stronger language without coming up to the force of Father
Hyacinthe's protest : " Contre ces doctrines, et ces pratiques qui se nomment
romaines, mais ne sont pas chretiennes, et qui dans leurs envahissements tuujours
plus audacieuxet plus funestes, tendenta changer la constitution de l'Eglise — contre
le divorce impie autant qu'insense, qu'on s'efforce d'acccmplir cntre l'Eglise et la
soiieie du dix-neuvieme siecle — contre cette opposition plus radicale et plus
effrayante encore avec la nature humaine atteinte et revoltee par ces faux docteurs
dans ses aspirations les plus indestructibles et les plus saiutes."
CHARGES.
277
in whose name it is carried on. When we consider the claims
which he inherits from his predecessors — all, in his eyes, " beyond
the hazard of disputation" — the collision into which he has been
brought, as a temporal prince, with the spirit of the age, and the
counsellors by whom he is surrounded,* we may well trust that
he has been governed by better motives than vanity or ambition,
and that he sincerely believes his universal sovereignty to be the
condition of all hope for the future of mankind. And this belief
is, no doubt, very generally shared by his clergy, most of whom
have been led by the insecurity of their relations to the State, to
look to him as their only permanent support. A far graver
responsibility seems to me to rest on the allies whom he has found
within our own pale. There may however be a certain kind of
consistency in the conduct of those who being avowedly at one with
him in mind, heart, and soul, only stand aloof in visible profession,
on some nice point of honour or etiquette, t The cry for reunion
* It seems to be universally admitted as a notorious fact, that the Pope is in the
hands of a party. Father Hyaointhe, in his celebrated letter to his Superior, speaks
of " the intrigues of a party all-powerful at Rome." But it is questioned who they
are. They are commonly supposed to be the Jesuits. What is certain is, that the
Jesuits, from the first institution of their order, have been distinguished by their
zeal in the prosecution of Ihe two objects which Pius IX. seems to have most at
heart : the extension of Mariolatry, and the absolute monarchy of the Pope. As to
the first, they did all in their power to popularize the doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception (see in Gieseler, iii. c. iii. sec. 60, note 19, the persecution which they
kindled against the Dominicans) ; as to the second object, we have seen in a
previous note the doctrine of Lainez. It was that of the Society.
" We owe it to Bell irmine and other Jesuits, that in some documents the Pope is
expressly designated Vice-God." — Janus, p. 39.
Mr. Cobb (p. 27) thinks " that if the Pope be in the hands of the Jesuits it is a very
good thing for us ; he might be in plenty worse." Perhaps he should know. But
the reason he assigns is not very reassuring ; for it amounts only to that which no
one who knows their history can doubt : that their conduct will be governed by their
view of expediency. The sons of Loyola were never supposed to be deficient in the
wisdom of the serpent. One of the worst features in Mr. Cobb's pamphlet is his
attempt to gain credit to the Jesuits for moderation, as if an object was the better (or
the craft and dissimulation with which it is attained. The Pope would, no doubt, be
delighted to see the Inquisition, described by his organ, " La Civiltd " (see Janus,
p. 12), as" a sublime spectacle of social perfection," planted in England ; but it is not
a Jesuit who would advise him immediately to issue a Bull for that purpose.
t This appears to be the most appropriate description for the " grievances of the
most advanced among us," enumerated by Mr. Cobb (p. 36). Compared with the
importance of the subject, and the danger to which the Pope alludes in his letter to
Archbishop Manning, they seem indeed very paltry and pitiful.
278
BISHOP THIRL WALL' 8
with Rome comes naturally from those who are doing all in their
power to break up the unity of the Church of England. But for
all others I can conceive no line of conduct at once more inconsis-
tent and more cruel, than to offer demonstrations of sympathy
which can only serve to foster what, as members of a Reformed
Church, we believe to be a spirit of error, and a calamitous
delusion.
I am well aware, my Reverend Brethren, how far you are from
incentive to the slightest tendency toward this kind of unfaithfulness
loyidtyto ° J
the Church. t0 tbe principles of your own Church, and that to many
of you it may seem something strange and almost incredible. Let
me then remind you that its existence is an additional reason why
you should not be content with a merely negative loyalty. At
such a juncture as the present, whether we look abroad or at home,
we must feel that our Church has a right to some positive proofs
of our allegiance and affection. You repudiate the jurisdiction
claimed by the Bishop of Rome, not only because the claim rests
on no more solid ground than a fanciful interpretation of Scripture
and a corruption of primitive tradition, but because you believe
him to be in spiritual things, not merely a fallible, but a blind and
actually erring guide. I rejoice to know that such is your convic-
tion, and I am sure that the farther you inquire into the position
of our Church in this controversy, the more fully you will be
assured of its essential agreement with primitive faith and order.
Certainly you cannot prize this privilege too highly, or watch over
it too jealously. But that which concerns us most is, not that we
go to no other, but that we do go to Him Who alone hath the
words of eternal life. It is that we strive to live and labour, as under
His immediate eye ; that we search the Scriptures more and more
diligently, not for that which ministers to doubtful disputations,
but for that which will nourish our own souls and those committed
to our charge. It is that, while we neglect no light which the
Church supplies, or to which she directs us for our guidance, we
endeavour to lay open our hearts and minds to that heavenly
teaching, which is at the same time the unfailing source of all holy
comfort. Whether our appointed sphere of duty be large or
CHARGES.
279
narrow, conspicuous or obscure, each, may try to fill it, as if the
welfare of the whole body depended on his individual exertions,
and as if the view taken of the Church from without, would be
entirely governed by the character of his life and ministry. More
than this cannot be required by the Church, or by her Divine
Head. Does he require less ? I leave the answer to your private
meditations.
APPENDIX.
(A.)
List of Churches newly built or under restoration since the last Visita-
tion.
Archdeaconry of Carmarthen.
Merthyr (entirely rebuilt).
Pendine.
Llangain.
Llanllwch.
Loughor.
Archdeaconry of St. David's.
The Cathedral (half finished).
Lambston.
Laniphey.
Rhoscrowther.
St. Florence.
Archdeaconry of Cardigan.
Elerch (new).
Lampeter (new).
Archdeaconry of Brecon.
Llandrindod (new).
Vaynor (new).
Crickhowell.
Gladestry.
Nantmel (Parish Church and new School Chapel).
Taffechan.
AFPENDIX.
281
(B.)
What is Transubstantiation ?
Mr. Cobb ("Kiss of Peace," p. 100 foil.) has endeavoured to show that
it is only through a vulgar error, that persons unacquainted with scho-
lastic language, have supposed that the Roman doctrine of Transubstan-
tiation is at variance with that of the Church of England. The same
opinion is intimated in the Declaration, commonly known as Archdeacon
Denison's, on the Real Objective Presence, by the words commonly called
" Transubstantiation." The mistake, Mr. Cobb thinks, has been, that
Transubstantiation, properly so called, that is, the conversion of the sub-
stance of the consecrated elements, has been confused with what he has
happily termed Transaccidentation, that is, a change in their sensible
properties, or accidents, which both Churches deny, while the Transub-
stantiation which is really taught by the Church of Rome, is not denied,
but virtually held by the Church of England. The Twenty-eighth
Article Mr. Cobb supposes to have been aimed, not at the Roman doctrine,
but at that which had been mistaken for it. It may seem surprising that
there should be any room for doubt as to the meaning of Transubstantiation
in the Roman sense, when it has been defined by the Council of Trent,
in a Chapter (Sess. xiii. cap. iv.) headed De Transubstantiatione. We
there read, " Sancta haec Synodus declarat per consecrationem panis et
vini, conversionem fieri totius substantive panis in substantiam Corporis
Christi Domini nostri, et totius substantia? vini in substantiam Sanguinis
ejus. Quae conversio convenienter et proprie a sancta Catholica Ecclesia
Transubstantiatio est appellata." But as substance is the name given to
a thing utterly unknown, and to our present faculties absolutely incon-
ceivable, this definition is in fact merely verbal, and tells us no more than
that a- takes the place of y. We must look elsewhere for some explana-
tion of the nature of the change, which may enable us to form a judgment
on Mr. Cobb's proposition. He himself relies on chap. i. and chap. iii.
In chap, i., on the words, " Nec enim hroc inter se pugnant, ut ipse
Salvator noster semper ad dexteram Patris in ccelis assideat, juxta modum
existendi naturalem, et ut multis nihilominus aliis in locis sacramentaliter
prsesens sua substantia nobis adsit, ea existendi ratione quam, etsi ver-
bis exprimere vix possumus, possibilem tamen esse Deo, cogitatione per
fidem illustrate, assequi possumus, et constantissime credere debemus."
Having cited this passage, Mr. Cobb asks, " Can any thing be plainer
than that tbe Church of Rome here distinguishes between the ' natural '
and the ' spiritual,' or, as she calls it, the ' sacramental ' mode of Christ's
presence, and maintains with us that Christ's natural Body is in Heaven,
282
APPENDIX.
and not here " (this is an interpolation of Mr. Cobb's), " it being against
the truth of Christ's natural Body to be at one time in more places than
one, whereas she holds that this is possible with the ' spiritual ' body,
although we cannot express the mode of its existence, that is, the laws
to which it conforms ? "
What to me is made plain by this remark, is that Mr. Cobb is not a
competent expounder of Roman doctrine. It is clear that he has con-
founded two things, between which Roman Divines most carefully distin-
guish, viz. the natural body and the natural mode of its existence. The
Council does not deny the presence of the natural body in the Sacrament,
but only that it is there according to its natural mode of existence. In
this \ "iry chapter it repeatedly urges the literal interpretation of our
Lord's words, in proof of the reality of His Flesh and Blood in the
Sacrament, without any qualifying expression (" post panis vinique bene-
dictionem se suum ipsius Corpus illis prrebere, ac suum Sanguinem,
disertis ac perspicuis verbis testatus est "), and it inveighs against those
who distort them " ad fictitios et imaginarios tropos, quibus Veritas " —
not substantia — " Carnis et Sanguinis Christi negatur." Mr. Cobb also
asserts, that the Church of Rome maintains with us (in the Declaration
on Kneeling) that " Christ's natural Body is in Heaven, and not here, it
being against the truth of Christ's natural Body to be in more places than
one ; " but he offers no proof of this assertion, and if he had sought
would have been unable to find one. In the Appendix to m3T last Charge
I cited two passages, one from the posthumous Systema Theologicum of
Leibnitz, the other from Lacordaire, both assuming that, according to
the doctrine of the Church of Rome, Christ's natural Body is in many
places at once, and endeavouring to show that it is possible. The dispute
between the Franciscans and the Dominicans at the Council of Trent —
one party contending that the Body of Christ was translated from Heaven
into the Sacrament ; the other, that it was created by each consecration
— proceeded on this assumption. Nor without this would there have
been any such stupendous miracle as to render it necessary to insist upon
the text (Luke i. 37), With God nothing shall be impossible (Catechismus
Romanus, Pars ii. cap. iv. Qmest. xxxv).
Mr. Cobb also cites chapter iii. of the same Session, where the
Council teaches as " the faith ever held in the Church of God, that
instantly after consecration, the true Body of our Lord and His true
Blood are there (existere), together with His Soul and Godhead, under
the form of Bread and Wine ; but with the distinction, that the presence
of the Body under the form of bread, and of the Blood under the form of
wine, is due to the words of consecration (ex vi verborum) ; while, by
virtue of the natural connexion and concomitance, whereby the parts of
the risen Lord are knit together, the Body is there under the form of
wiue, and the Blood under the form of bread, and the Soul under both.
APPENDIX.
283
Moreover, the Godhead is there, in consequence of the admirable hypo-
static union between it and the Body and Soul. Wherefore it is most
true that as much (tantumdem) is contained under either form as under
both ; for Christ whole and entire is there under the form of bread, and
under every part of that form ; also whole Christ under the form of wine,
and under its parts." (" Ipsum Corpus sub specie vini, et Sanguinem
sub specie panis, animamque sub utraque, vi naturalis illius connexionis
et concoruitantise, qua partes Christi Domini, qui jam ex mortuis resur-
rexit non amplius moriturus, inter se copulantur, Divinitatem porro
propter admirabilem illam ejus cum corpore et anima hypostaticam
unionem. Quapropter verissimum est tantumdem sub alterutra specie
atque sub utraque contineri. Totus enim et integer Christus sub panis
specie et sub quavis ipsius speciei parte, totus item sub vini specie, et
sub ejus partibus existit.")
Upon this, Mr. Cobb exclaims, " Now have we, I ask, in the whole
range of our Liturgy, Articles, and Catechism, any more emphatic decla-
ration of a wholly supernatural, transcendental, celestial Presence, or any
more emphatic disclaimer of a natural sensible corporeal Presence, than
this ? " And he then breaks out into a strain of rapturous admiration on
this " exalted, majestic, glorious belief," and of indignation at the " per-
sons of authority and influence in our Church, who have imputed the
teaching of a ' carnal ' view to the Church of Rome." But there is a
question which must be allowed to take precedence of Mr. Cobb's ; and
it is, whether in this quotation there is any such " declaration," or any
such " disclaimer," as he describes ; and whether that which he finds in
it has not been imported into it by himself, without any warrant or any
attempt at proof, through the confusion already noticed in his ideas,
between a presence and the mode of a presence. That this is really the
case, I believe I can prove beyond a doubt, by the evidence of the
Roman Catechism, the most authentic exposition of the doctrine of the
Council, and of Bellarmine, whose authority on such a point will not be
questioned.
In the Catechism (P. ii. cap. iv. Quasst. xvii.) it is stated, " Since we
observe that bread and wine are every day changed by the force of
nature into human flesh and blood, we may be the more easily led, by
this similitude, to believe that the substance of bread and wine are con-
verted into the true Flesh of Christ and His true Blood, by heavenly
benediction." (" Cum panem et vinum in humanam carnem et san-
guinem quotidie vi natura? immutari animadvertimus, facilius adduci
possumus hac siniilitudine, ut credamus, panis et vini substantias in
veram Christi Carnem, verumque ejus Sanguinem, ccclesti benedictione
converti.") Under the twenty second Quastio, we find an enumeration
of three "most admirable effects wrought by consecration in the Sacra-
ment." The first is, " that the true Body of the Lord Christ, that same
284
APFENDIX.
which, born of the Virgin, is seated in heaven at the right hand of the
Father, is contained in this Sacrament." ("Priinum est, verum Christi
Domini Corpus, illud idem, quod, natum ex Virgine, in coelis sedat ad
dexteram Patris, hoc Sacramento contineri.") And this is still more dis-
tinctly explained in Quastio xxxiv., " The Body is truly conjoined with
the Godhead : the Body born of the holy Virgin ; not that the very Body
which was taken up, comes down from heaven (the opinion of the Fran-
ciscans), but that the bread itself and the wine are transmuted into the
Body and Blood of Christ." (" Corpus secundum veritatem conjunctum
est Divinitati : corpus ex sancta Virgine ; non quod ipsum corpus assump-
tum de ccelo descendat, sed quod ipse panis et vinum in Corpus et
Sanguinem Christi transmutentur.") I may observe, by the way, that
in the title of this Qucrstio, the Catechism has, by anticipation, refuted
Mr. Cobb's remark (" Kiss of Peace," p. 112) on the use of the plural
substances in the "Declaration on Kneeling," which — though with a
creditable misgiving — he considers as an indication of inaccuracy. For
the title runs, " Quomodo fit tarn adnriranda substantiarum conversio,"
viz. " ut tota panis substantia divina virtute in totam Corporis Christi
substantiam, totaque vini substantia in totam sanguinis Christi sub-
stantiam, sine ulla Domini nostri mutatione convertatur." Mr. Cobb
has no less reason for misgiving about his criticism on the words " very "
and " natural," as epithets of " substances." It is grounded on his
purely arbitrary assertion (p. Ill) that " substance" is not " natural,"
but " supernatural," for which he has no reason to give, but that its
nature is not known to us. He may be at liberty to define what he
means by " nature," so as to confine it to that which is known to man ;
but he can have no right to make this private definition the ground of an
argument which is to convince others.
If the extracts already given do not speak plainly enough, all reason-
able doubt must, I think, be removed by the twenty-seventh Quastio,
which is entitled, "An ossa, nervi, et quscunque ad hominis perfectionem
pertinent, una cum Divinitate, hie vere adsint ?" " Are bones, nerves,
and whatsoever things pertain to the perfection of man, really present
here together with the Godhead ? " The answer is meant to show that
this not only is, but must be so. " Here, too, it must be explained that
not only the true Body of Christ, and whatsoever pertains to the true nature
of a body, as bones and nerves, but also whole Christ is contained in this
Sacrament. For the pastor must teach that Christ is the name of God
and man, that is, of one person, in whom the Divine and human nature
are united together; wherefore it includes each substance, and the things
which belong to each substance, the Godhead and the whole human nature,
which consists of the soul and of all parts of the body, and also the blood,
all which must be believed to be in the Sacrament. For since in heaven
the whole manhood is united to the Godhead in one person and hypo-
APPENDIX.
285
stasis, it may not be suspected that the body, which is in the Sacrament,
is separated from the same Godhead." (" Hoc loco etiam explicandum
est, non solum verum Christi Corpus, et quicquid ad reram corporis
rationem pertinet, veluti ossa et nervos, sed etiam totum Christum in hoc
Sacramento contineri. Docere autem oportet, Christum, nomen esse
Dei et hominis, unius scilicet personae, in qua divina et humana natura
conjuncta sit : quare utramque substantiam, et qua utrique substantia con-
sequentia sunt, Divinitatem et totam humanam naturam, quae ex anima et
omnibus corporis partibus, et sanguine etiam constat, complectitur, qua
omnia in Sacramento esse credendum est. Nam cum in ccelo tota
humanitas Divinitati in una persona et hypostasi conjuncta sit, nefas est
suspicari, Corpus, quod in Sacramento inest, ab eadem Divinitate sejunc-
tum esse.") It seems impossible to state more clearly that the substance
which after consecration takes the place of the substances of the bread
and wine, does not, and cannot exist apart from its consequential, which
include all things pertaining to the completeness of human nature, as
bones and nerves ; in other words, the natural body in its full integrity.
But for a fuller explanation of the mode of the Presence, and of the
language in which it may be correctly described, we must turn to Bellar-
mine. In the second chapter of the first book of his treatise, " De
Sacramento Eucbaristite," he first comments at length on the terms, vere,
realiter, and substantialiter, in which the mode of the Presence is de-
scribed at the beginning of cap. i., sess. 13, of the Council of Trent, and
then proceeds to lay down certain rules for speaking correctly on the
subject. We must bear in mind that Mr. Cobb believes that " nothing
can be plainer " than that in this very chapter the Church of Rome dis-
tinguishes between the " natural " and the spiritual, or, as she calls it,
the Sacramental mode of Christ's Presence, and maintains with us that
" Christ's natural Body is in Heaven, and not here : " while in cap. iii. of
the same Session he finds " a most emphatic declaration of a wholly
supernatural, transcendental, celestial Presence," and " a most emphatic
disclaimer of a natural, sensible, corporeal Presence." Bellarmine, in his
second rule, contradicts these assertions almost as if he had foreseen
them. He says, " Dicemus quidem Corpus Christi, ut est in Eucharistia,
esse verum, reale, naturale, animatum, quantum, coloratura, &c, et Car-
nem illam dicemus esse corporalem non spiritualem, nisi nomen spirituale
sumatur sicut 1 Cor. xv., Seminatur corpus animate, surget spirituale, id
est obediens spiritui in omnibus. At non dicemus Corpus Christi in
Eucharistia esse sensibile, visibile, tangibile, extensum, licet tale sit in
ccelo." In his third rule about adverbs, he observes, "Dicemus Chris-
tum esse in Eucharistia vere, realiter, substantialiter, ut Concilium recte
loquitur, sed non dicemus corporaliter, id est eo modo quo suapte natura
existunt corpora, nec sensibilitor, mobiliter," &c, and he would recom-
mend great caution in the use of such language as St. Bernard's, who
286
APPENDIX.
affirmed, " In Sacramento exhiberi nobis veram carnis substantiam, sed
spiritualiter non carnaliter." The negative he thinks would be
dangerous: " Periculum esset, ne traheretur ab adversariis non tarn ad
rnodum quamad ipsam naturam sigrdficandam." The reader will observe
that the misconstruction which Bellarmine apprehends from adversaries,
is the very misconception into which Mr. Cobb, though so far from an
adversary, has actually fallen. He has confounded the natura with the
modus existendi, and, with the most friendly intentions, has misrepre-
sented the doctrine of the Church of Koine, making her deny what she
asserts, and assert what she denies. Bellarmine will call the Body in
the Eucharist, not only true and real, but natural. He will attribute to
it life, bulk, colour, &c, i. e. all things belonging to the perfection of the
natural body, and he will call the Flesh corporeal, not spiritual, unless the
word spiritual be taken in a sense consistent with the nature of body.
But he will not call the Body sensible, as if that epithet was equivalent,
as Mr. Cobb supposes it to be, to natural, and corporeal.
Mr. Cobb's mistake is not surprising, nor, I think, discreditable to him.
Independently of his affection for the Church of Rome, he might well be
loth to attribute to her such a doctrine as that which Bellarmine expounds.
It supposes a twofold miracle : one, by which the Presence is produced ;
the other, still more stupendous, by which the first is concealed ; and
both depend upon a third, of perhaps a still higher order. For whereas
it has not been questioned that the two former are possible to God, this
appears to belong to a class which is generally admitted to exceed the
power of Omnipotence itself. If a substance and its accidents are corre-
latives, it can be no more possible for the accidents to exist without their
substance than the parts without their whole.
This doctrine of Transubstantiation is clearly not that which excites
Mr. Cobb's enthusiastic admiration, but it is, I believe, that of the Church
of Rome, and nothing short of this would satisfy a devout Roman
Catholic. When in a Roman Catholic city, the Host is brought forth in
a gorgeous procession, surrounded by all that splendour to which the
Council of Trent (Sess. xiii. cap. v.) attributes so much efficacy — amidst
a blaze of lights, clouds of incense, showers of roses — what do the people
understand to be the object of their adoration ? Certainly not a meta-
physical entity, an incorporeal substance ; but Christ Himself, perfect
God and perfect man : in the full integrity of His manhood, not a bone,
not a nerve, not a hair wanting ; in His full, proper, natural dimensions,
— but all unseen, hidden under a veil. " The faithful," says the Cate-
chism (u. s. Quasst. xxvi.), " can never sufficiently admire the perfection
of Holy Church and her height of glory, seeing that between that and
the heavenly blessedness there is only one degree of difference. For
this we have in common with the dwellers in heaven, that both have
Christ, God and man, present. The only difference is, that they enjoy
APPENDIX.
287
the beatific vision of His presence, we adore Him, present, but withdrawn
from the sense of the eyes, concealing Himself under the admirable covering
of the sacred mysteries, by a firm and steadfast faith." ("Ac profecto
satis mirari fideles nunquam poterunt sancta? Ecclesias perfectionem,
ejusque gloria; altitudinem ; cum inter earn et ccelestem beatitudinem,
unus tantum gradus interesse videatur. Hoc enim nobis cum coelitibus
commune est, ut utrique Christum, Deuni et hominem, pra?sentem
habeamus : sed (quo uno gradu ab iis distamus) illi prresentis beata
visione perfruuntur ; nos praesentem et tamen«i oculorum sensu remotum,
sacrorum mysteriorum admirabili integumento se occultantem, firma et con-
stant fide veneramur.") It would, to say the least, be a very singular
way of speaking, to Bay that a thing, invisible in itself, like substance, is
hidden by a covering, and withdrawn from the sense of the eyes, to which it
never was, or could be subject. But according to my view of the doc-
trine, all is clear and consistent.
I do not wonder indeed that such a belief should appear too extrava-
gant to have been ever admitted into a sane mind. But according to the
view of the Church of Rome, this apparent extravagance is the very thing
which constitutes the merit of the belief. " Credo quia impossible est."'
This is one of the reasons assigned by the Roman Catechism (Quaest.
xxxviii.) for which it was Christ's pleasure to give His Body and Blood
under the form of bread and wine. " It would have been shocking to
human nature to feed on human flesh, and to drink human blood." It
would also have exposed Christians to calumny from unbelievers, if they
had been seen to eat the Lord under His own form. Another advantage
is, that when we receive the Lord's Body and Blood, in such a way, that
what is really done cannot be perceived by the senses, this serves much
to increase faith in our minds, faith being considered as a grace which is
strengthened by exercise (" dum Corpus et Sanguinem Domini ita sumi-
mus ut tamen quod vere f t, sensibus jiercijn non possit, hoc ad fidem in
animis nostris augendam plurimum valet, qua; quidem ibi non habet
meritum, ubi humana ratio prnabet experimcntum "'). That which is
received is the very natural Body and Blood, but hidden from sense by
the elements. I cannot see how the language and the whole argument
of the passage admit of any other interpretation. And I have no doubt
that it was in the literal sense that Aquinas meant to be understood,
when he sang,
" Vcrbum Caro panem verum
Verbo carnom efficit : —
Fitque Sanguis Cliristi merum ;
Et, si sensus deficit,
Ad firmandurn cor sincerum
Sola fides sufficit."
The translation in " Hymns Ancient and Modern," " which whoso
288
APPENDIX.
takcth, must from carnal thoughts be free," gives a turn to the thought
which I believe to be quite foreign to the author's meaning.
I "will only add one remark. Whether it is Mr. Cobb or myself that
is in error on this question, what are we to think of the teaching of a
Church which expresses herself on such an article of faith so as to leave
room for such a difference of opinion as to her meaning ? one, it must be
observed, not at all arising out of the obscurity of the subject itself, but
entirely out of the manner in which she has treated it. It was not with-
out good eause that Pius IV., in the Bull of Confirmation of the Council,
forbade the publishing of any commentaries, or any kind of interpretation
of its decrees, without his authority (" ne quis sine auctoritate nostra
audeat ullos commentaries, glossas, annotationes, scholia, ullumve omnino
interpretationis genus super ipsius Concilii decretis quocunque modo
edere "). Should any one find any thing obscure in them, and needing
interpretation or decision, let him go up to the Apostolical See (" ci cui
vero in eis aliquid obscurius dictum et statutum fuisse, eamque ob causam
interpretatione aut decisione aliqua egere, visum fuerit, ascendat ad
locum quern Dominus elegit, ad Sedem videlicet Apostolicam. Deut.
xvii. 8").
It would have been better if the Council had spared him and the faith-
ful this trouble, by a little greater perspicuity.
(C.)
After the Charge had been delivered at three out of the four places of
my Visitation, I learnt, by a private letter from a gentleman who had
seen some account of it in a London paper, that the statement, that
" the Union was brought about against the will of the great majority of
the Irish people," is disputed : and I was courteously invited to refer my
correspondent to " the sources from which I had drawn this conclusion."
I am aware that the subject is one on which it is impossible, especially
after an interval of seventy years, to speak with certainty, and that no
authority can be absolutely conclusive. But I think that so strong a
presumption is raised in favour of the statement, by the whole course of
previous and subsequent history, as to throw the burden of proof on
those who deny it, and that this presumption is confirmed by the nature
of the means which the Government had to employ to carry the measure
through the Irish Parliament. I will, however, refer the reader to
Massey's " History of England," and to Goldwin Smith's " Irish History
and Irish Character." Mr. Massey writes (Vol. iv. p. 334), " However
APPENDIX.
289
conclusive the argument in favour of Union may appear to Englishmen,
it was difficult for an Irishman to regard the Union in any other view
than as a measure to deprive his country of her independent constitution,
and to extinguish her national existence." It seems to me clear, that
when this was the general feeling, real consent to the Union must have
been the exception, hostility the rule. So Mr. Massey observes (p.
347), " There was one mode of carrying the Union, and one mode only.
Bribery of every kind must be employed, without hesitation and without
stint." I cannot take into the account on the side of the Union, either
votes so purchased, or support obtained by delusive promises. " The
consent of the Catholic clergy," observes Mr. Goldwin Smith (p. 178),
" so far as that body did consent, must be held to have been vitiated,
since hopes of an arrangement in their favour were held out to them, and
not fulfilled." And as he says, p. 186, " Of the absurdity and iniquity
of a Union, which excluded three-fourths of the people of one nation, on
the ground of their religion, from the common legislature, there is now
no need to dwell." Were these " three-fourths," " the great majo-
rity of the Irish people," absolutely insensible to this " absurdity and
iniquity ? "
Mr. Massey is impartial, and all Mr. Goldwin Smith's leaning is in
favour of the Union. I know how cautiously the views and judgments
of such a violent partisan as Mr. Mitchel are to be received. Yet I do
not believe that he wilfully misstates facts, and therefore I think I may
refer to his " History of Ireland," vol. ii. chap. iii. and foil., in confirma-
tion of my conclusion.
vol.. II.
V
XI.
A CHARGE
Delivered October and November, 1872.
THE VATICAN COUNCIL. — DISSENSIONS IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
THE ATHANASIAN CREED. THE EDUCATION ACT OF 1870.
My Reverend Brethren,
I cannot meet you on this occasion without a personal
reflection, which, if I was ahle, I should not think it right to
suppress. The temporary disability by which I was compelled,
two years ago, to seek assistance for my last Confirmation, called
forth marks of sympathy and kindness which I can never forget.
But it also admonished me that the time could not be very far
distant when my strength would no longer suffice even for the
ordinary work of the Diocese, to say nothing of new calls which
might be expected to arise out of the shifting circumstances of the
Church. And I now address you with the solemnity of a deep
conviction that this is the last time my voice will be heard from
this chair. But speaking under this feeling, I do not know how
I could better avail myself of the present opportunity than
according to my practice in past years, when I have been used to
take a broad survey of our condition and prospects, and to express
my opinion on the main topics which had arisen in the intervals
of successive Visitations to occupy the minds of Churchmen, and
affect the interests of the Church. In the course of an episcopate
protracted far beyond the average length, these topics have been
constantly growing in number and magnitude, and have often
rendered it difficult to avoid exceeding the ordinary measure of a
BISHOP THIELWALL'S CHARGES.
291
Visitation Charge. On the present occasion I believe I shall be
in least danger of trespassing unduly on your patience, if I first
look out on that which lies farthest on our horizon, and then pass
to matters in which we are, if not more deeply, yet, as it may
seem, more immediately concerned.
The most important event that has taken place since our last
meeting — one, I venture to say, far more important than the
great change in the balance of power which we have witnessed
during the same interval — is the promulgation of the new dogma
decreed by the Council of the Vatican, on the 18th of .
J Infallibility
July, 1870, by which the decisions of the Pope in all °nhe Pope-
questions of faith and morals were declared to be irreformable,
that is, absolutely exempt from possibility of error, as Divine
Revelation, irrespectively of any previous or subsequent assent of
the Church, whether diffused throughout Christendom, or repre-
sented in a General Council. I cannot expect that all my hearers
should fully appreciate the importance of this event. Many may
have wanted leisure or means of studying its character and
bearings, and may see in it nothing more than a fresh display of
arrogant pretensions, which illustrate the character of the Papacy,
but make no alteration in the state of things, so far, at least, as
we are concerned. I am very sure that it can be so regarded
only by those who do not comprehend its nature ; and I believe
there is no subject of deeper practical interest to every one of us,
or on which a portion of our time can be more profitably
employed.
Though the number of Bishops brought together in the
Vatican Council appears to have exceeded that of every m,
1 A J The Vatican
previous Synod, its right to the title of an (Ecumenical
or General Council has been questioned. And, no
doubt, if it is tried by the standard of Anglican orthodoxy, it
will be found wanting in one particular. It is laid down in our
Twenty-first Article that " General Councils may not be gathered
together without the commandment and will of Princes." But
the Vatican Council was convoked by the mere will and pleasure
of the Pope, not only without regard to any secular authority,
v 2
292
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
but so as expressly to exclude all reference to any such authority,*
and with a studied display of independence, which was treated by
the advocates of the Papacy as matter of boastful exultation. It
was, no doubt, a very significant innovation on the practice of
former ages. But I do not find that any scruple was felt by
Roman Catholics of any school with regard to the (Ecumenicity
of the Council on this account ; and considering the circumstances
of the time, I cannot attribute much weight to this objection. It
is at least conceivable that such a gathering might be urgently
needed for the interests of the Church, and yet that the state of
public affairs might make it impossible to obtain the express
concurrence of the Powers whose consent was required. In such
a case their passive acquiescence might perhaps be deemed
equivalent to an expression of their will. Very remarkable, no
Convoked doubt, is the contrast between the circumstances under
ferent eir- which the Council of the Vatican was convoked, and
from the those of the Council of Trent, in this, as indeed in
Council of
Trent. almost every other respect. The Council of the
sixteenth century was forced by the Emperor on a reluctant
Pope, who dreaded nothing so much as that Reformation of the
Church in Head and Members which it was the Emperor's main
object to bring about; t and the place at which it was held was
selected for the convenience of access to the Princes who appeared
by their envoys at the Council.J That of the Vatican was
viewed with apprehension and distrust by all the Roman Catholic
Sovereigns, who knew that they had nothing but evil to expect
from it, and the more because it was to be held at Rome, where
it would be completely subject to the power and influence of the
Pope. This contrast may suggest some instructive reflections on
the course of that development which has reached its culminating
point in the new dogma. But it seems to me that it would be
* For the negotiation on this subject see Quirinus, " Romische Briefe vom Concil,"
p. 24.
t Faleotto, " Acta Concilii Tridentini," ed. Mendham, p. 10, admits the prevailing
belief, though holding it to be sufficiently refuted by the convocation of the Council.
X Paleotto, u. s., p. 11, " ut facilius Christiani principes possent con venire." Cf.
y iiirLnus, u. s., p. 11.
CHARGES.
293
going too far to say that no change of circumstances could justify
such a variation in the mode of proceeding.
There is another point of view in which the Council of the
Vatican fails altogether to satisfy our notion of a General Council,
inasmuch as it is not, and does not even claim to be, _ , . .
' Excluded a
commensurate with the whole extent of the Christian th7n^-°f
World. It confessedly excluded a very large part of tianw0lld-
Christendom ; only, however, it must be observed, those who,
according to the Roman view, were disqualified from taking
part in its deliberations by heresy or schism, and who rejected
the invitations by which they were summoned to entitle them-
selves to its privileges by repentance and submission. To the
Churches of the East, proud of their antiquity and their imma-
culate orthodoxy, and to the Churches of the Reformation,
united in opposition to the corruptions of Rome, such invita-
tions could hardly sound otherwise than as an insult unworthy
of serious notice. But we cannot be surprised that from the
Roman point of view they should seem to justify the assump-
tion of a title which else would have stood in glaring contrast
to the real character of the assembly. So far therefore the
question of (Ecumenicity is only a branch of the general con-
troversy between Rome and the Churches which reject her
authority.
Neither of these objections appears to me to touch the main
point. According to ideas which are not peculiar to the Church
of Rome, a purely clerical assembly, in which no layman had
either vote or consultative voice, might be fully competent to deal
with questions of doctrine which affected nothing but religious
convictions, especially if, like the dogma of the Immaculate Con-
ception, they were totally destitute of practical interest, and
utterly unworthy of notice, except for the audacity of their inven-
tion. But that which the Council of the Vatican n, .
Object of its
undertook to decide, was not only the fundamental conTOCati°n-
doctrine of the Christian faith, that on which all others must
ultimately rest, but a question most deeply affecting the whole
framework and the very foundation of civil society, the institu-
294
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
tions of every State,* the peace of every household. The work
for which it was assembled was not simply a new ecclesiastical
constitution, but, through and under cover of this, a complete
political and social revolution. It is only when this is clearly
understood, that we can duly appreciate the audacity by which
the laity were excluded from all share in deliberation on matters
so nearly concerning all that was most precious to them, and were
expected to receive the decrees of their spiritual guides with
passive submission. And fully to estimate the boldness of this
attempt, we must recollect the vast strides which the human mind
has taken in the last three centuries, and the consequent growing-
impatience of clerical dominion and dictation.
To members of the Roman communion who admit the Pope's
authority to convoke a General Council, and the formal QZcume-
nicity of the Vatican Synod, there remain only two questions of
any moment ; one, whether the Council was free, the other,
whether the dogma it decreed is a truth of Divine Revelation.
Indeed, since every Roman Catholic is bound to admit the
infallibility of a General Council, the two questions resolve them-
Freedom in- selves into one, and the whole turns on the single issue
todeiibera- of freedom, which is agreed on all hands to be indis-
tive assem-
bles- pensable to the validity of the proceedings of every
deliberative assembly, and above all of a General Council. f The
truth of the dogma indeed cannot depend on the freedom of the
Council. If true, it would have been equally so though the
Council had never met : as the Council itself does not profess to
make, but only to find and declare, the truth. + But the obliga-
tion of the faithful to accept its decrees, depends not on their
truth, but on its authority, of which freedom is an essential con-
dition. And when we are considering how the issue is likely to
* On the political aspect and consequences of the Dogma, see the petition drawn
up bv Cardinal Bauseher in Friedrich's " Documenta " ii., p. 388.
f " LiLertas ilia, quam oportuit esse in omnibus consultationibus, maxime vero
de rebus sacris." (Jewell, Epist. De Concilio Tridentino.) But I do not see that
the Bishops of the Vatican Council were bound by their oath of obedience to the
Pope, to accept any definition proposed to them, even with his express sanction.
t " Ecclcsia in suis definitionibus semper est Testis, et judicium nonnisi testando
eftoimat." (Archbiehop Kcniick in 1 riediich, "Documenta" i., p. 210.)
CHARGES.
295
affect the interests of the Church and of society, this becomes the
most important point in the whole inquiry.
The facts which bear upon it lie within a comparatively narrow
compass. The most notorious of all is that down to the eve of
the day on which the dogma was proclaimed, the want Th Counoil
of necessary freedom was the subject of incessant, notfree-
though unheeded, complaint, petition, and remonstrance, on the
part of the Minority in the Council itself.* The defect was
radically inherent in its composition. Virtually and practically it
was an Italian Council : Italy alone having more voices than all
the Roman Catholic countries of Europe together. This prepon-
derance of the Italian vote was further strengthened by a host of
titular prelates, many of them created for the occasion, without
churches or flocks, absolutely depending on the Pope for their
daily bread, and by chiefs of the monastic Orders entirely devoted
to him. On the other side was a Minority representing a popula-
tion of ninety millions, and of the most civilized nations of the
world. But the vote of each titular prelate counted for as much
as that of the occupant of the greatest see, and his testimony to
the tradition of the Church was received as of equal value.
The order of proceeding was so regulated as to make the result
depend on the will of the Pope, just as if the question 0rderof
of. his plenary authority had been already decided. The Proceedme-
public deliberations were so mere a mockery, that they were
carried on in a room where no speaker could be heard by more
than two-thirds of those present ; and none were allowed to print
their speeches, even for the sole use of their colleagues.f Neither
within nor without the Council Hall was there the possibility
* " Notre faiblesse vient de notre defaut de liberie, qui est radical. La majoriie
n'est pas libre. A notre arrivee tout etait fait sans nous. Mais voici ce qui aeheve
d'opprimer notre liberte ; elle est ccrasee de tout le poids du respect que nous porton8
a. notre chef. Nous avons trouve une majorite toute faite, tres-coinpacte," &c.
(Quirinns, Anhang, p. 656 if. Of. Friedrich, "Doc." i., pp. 138, 168. "Pie IX.
prejiige solennelleuient la question soumise au Concile." Ibid., p. 183.)
t "In prima congregatione generali, inter oratores, quorum aliqui fortissima
pollebant voce, ne unus quidem erat, quern omnes exaudire pos^ent Patres, et etiam
poxtquam aula in arctius reducta est, magna congregatorum pars cunctis, qu«3 dicta
Mint, percipiendis impar est." (Friedriuh i., p. 247. V. Scbuke, "Das Unfehi-
barkeits-Ducret.," p. 11.)
296
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
of a free interchange of ideas among the members.* The Council
was practically represented by a select committee nominated by
the Pope, either directly or through the Majority, composed, as
we have seen, so as to consist entirely of devoted partisans.
Pressure But the gravest of all obstacles to the freedom of dis-
exercised by
the Pope. cussion, was the pressure exercised by the Pope, who
neglected no opportunity, public or private, of making known that
the question was one in which he took the deepest personal
interest, and of denouncing the opponents of the dogma as
a faction hostile to himself and to the Church. It is difficult
for us adequately to conceive, but impossible to exaggerate, the
weight thus thrown into the scale among persons used to receive
every expression of the Papal mind and will with religious vene-
ration and awe.
Preeipita- This series of oppressive interferences with the liberty
tion of the - -_ _
Decree. oi the Council was fitly crowned by the scandalous
precipitation with which the measure, taken out of its place in the
prescribed order of the proceedings, was finally hurried through :
haste, which would have been indecent, even if the matter had
been one of slight moment, or which called for little study and
research, instead of being, as it was, the gravest of all questions
that could occupy the attention of the Christian world, reaching
more nearly to the foundation of the faith, and involving a wider
range of inquiry than any other. The Decree was ultimately
carried by a numerical majority, against all precedent, which in
such a case, above all, required moral unanimity ; in the absence
indeed of the dissentients, but after they had declared to the last
that their opinion remained unchanged.
Protest of A minority of more than a hundred protested, in the
the
minority. strongest terms consistent with respect for the Pope,
against the restraints imposed on the freedom of discussion, and
against the dogma itself. These protests they never withdrew,
and the facts on which their remonstrances were grounded could
not be changed by their subsequent submission, however it might
affect their character for courage or sincerity. Thoughtful lay-
t Friodiich, " Tagfibuch," pp. 33 and 47-
CHARGES.
297
men of their own communion, who had watched their proceedings
with deep sj^mpathy, and had been convinced by their arguments,
could not abandon their convictions, because their teachers had
become silent. It was not enough, as one of them remarked, for
such things to be retracted, unless they were also refuted. It had
gone forth to the world that the Vatican Council was one Character of
long intrigue, carried through by fraud and violence.* the CoxmoiL
No subsequent act of theirs coidd alter its character, or do more
than contribute a little to the temporary success of triumphant
iniquity. It remained not the less true that, since the Robber
Synod of Ephesus, no assembly claiming the title of a General
Council had been disgraced by more shameless breaches of freedom
and justice. If at Ephesus there was more of brutal violence,
there was at Rome an equally unscrupulous exertion of arbitrary
power, and a far greater depth of cunning.
To us however the most important question, indeed the only
one in which we can feel any immediate interest, is the Truth of m-
• i ■ i fallibility
truth oi the dogma. And m this case truth means — at considered,
least had until now been believed to mean — antiquity. We
must remember that the Council did not affect to proclaim any
now doctrine, or to invest the Papacy with any new dignity or
jurisdiction. The only purpose for which the Bishops were
supposed to be brought together was to attest the doctrine handed
down by tradition in their respective dioceses. How the titular
prelates who had no diocese could be qualified to bear such
witness, we are happily not concerned to explain. But the
proposition which the Council makes binding on the conscience
of everyone who acknowledges its authority, under penalty of
eternal perdition, is that the personal infallibility of the Pope was
revealed from the beginning, and has been held ever since by the
Church. With our recollections of the New Testament, we find
it difficult to conceive how so astounding a paradox could have
been seriously asserted. Independently however of scriptural
testimony, it was thought, not unreasonably, that a doctrine of
such a nature, of such constant application to cases which mus1
* Lord Acton, " Sendschrcibcn an einen Dculschen Bischof," p. 18.
298
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
have been continually arising, could never have been forgotten or
questioned in the Church ; and therefore that it is disproved by
the very fact that it has been found necessary, at the end of
eighteen centuries, to affirm it for the first time in a General
Council. And, waiving this objection, we may remark that if
Ecclesiastical History can show a single well-attested instance in
which a Pope has fallen into heresy, that would confessedly be
fatal to the dogma. No less conclusive to the same effect would
be a case in which a Pope had retracted a solemn judgment on an
article of faith. We are familiar with the error of Pope Honorius,
venial indeed in itself, but one which was accounted deadly heresy,
and repeatedly condemned both by Councils and his successors.
Attempts have been made to clear him from this charge, but it
appears to have been overlooked, that on the theory of personal
infallibility the charge could never have been brought against
him. The same remark applies to the waverings and retractations
of Liberius and Vigilius. On the modern theory, they were not
only impossible, but could never have been imputed to a Pope.
As little could cases have occurred in which the most solemn
dogmatical decrees of an infallible Pope were subjected to
examination and revision before they were adopted by a Council.
Yet this was not only a common case, but the constant rule of
proceeding.
illustration One illustration of the novelty and strangeness of the
dogma. dogma is so remarkable in itself, and so nearly concerns
us, as to deserve special notice. The belief which prevailed
among Protestants in this country, that the dogma which has
been now proclaimed was indeed an article of faith in the Church
of Rome, was the main obstacle to the admission of . Roman
Catholics to an equal share of civil rights. This obstacle was
only removed by the solemn assurances given by Roman Catholic
Bishops and eminent theologians that this doctrine formed no part
of the Roman Catholic faith.* The Irish members of the Vatican
Council, who retained a lively recollection of these events, found
* See the Speech of Archbishop Kenrick in Friedrich, " Doc." i., p. 213, and
Appendix.
CHARGES.
299
themselves called upon to take part in a proceeding hardly con-
sistent, as far as they were concerned, with common honesty.
That which, when a political object was to be gained, they had
represented as a calumnious invention, they were now required to
affirm to be, and to have ever been, the simple truth. "Who,"
one of them asked, " shall persuade Protestants that Catholics are
not acting contrary to honour and good faith, if, when civil rights
were in question, they professed that the Pope's infallibility did
not form a part of the Catholic faith, but when they had
obtained their end, retract this public profession, and affirm the
contrary ? " *
We had been used to suppose that the question belonged
to the domain of Ecclesiastical History, and that persons viewed in
. * . relation to
were competent to form a judgment upon it m propor- Ecciesias-
tion to their familiarity with that field of literature. History.
The value of the Italian vote in the Council was thought to be
greatly impaired by the notorious fact that the Italian Bishops
were on this point almost universally the dupes of the forgeries
which had imposed on Thomas Aquinas. Hundreds of such votes
would be outweighed by that of a single theologian who could
speak with the authority of a Hefele or a Dollinger. But since
the meeting of the Council it has been discovered that all this is a
mistake, that Ecclesiastical History has nothing to do with the
matter, that learning is quite superfluous for the solution of this
question, and that the very object of the Council is to dispense
with the need of scientific historical research. According to the
view of the most ardent advocate of the dogma, the history of the
Church can only be learnt from the witness she bears to herself,t
* Bishop Clifford, in Friedrich, ib. ii., p. 258.
t Friedrich, "Tagebuch," p. 85, gives an extract from an Italian pamphlet of
Archbishop Manning, published at Naples, 186s) : — " E ormai tempo che le preten-
sioni della ' scienza istorica' e di certi ' scienziati storici,' riducansi ai limiti della
propria sfera. E cio lara il Concilio, non con dispute ed alterciizioni, ma con le sole
parole, ' E piacuto alio Spiiito Santo ed a noi." — " La chiesa h la prova di se stessa,
anteriore alia sua istoria, e independente da essa. La sua istoria non pud che da essa
impararsi." (It is now time that the pretensions of "historical science" and of
certain " scientific historians " should be reduced to the limits of their proper sphere.
And this the Council will do, not by disputes and altercations, but by the simple
words, " It has seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us." The Church is the proof
300
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
which is now gathered up in the single oracle of the infallible
Pope, whose assertion of his own infallibility needs no corrobo-
The histo rati°n from any other testimony ; and according to the
Romish same authority, this infallibility is a personal charisma,
tobetotmt known by inward experience to the person who has
om erse . ^eeii favoure(j wjth it, and to him alone. With him
alone rests the exercise which he may think fit to make of his
gift. It can never be subject to any external limitation. That
wbich he declares to have taken place in the past, in all matters
affecting religion — such as the Assumption of the Virgin Mary —
becomes historical fact. That which he teaches on points touch-
ing faith and morals becomes theological truth. No one has a
right to try either the fact or the truth by any other standard.
It is to be accepted as the voice of the Holy Ghost, just as if he
was incarnate in the person of the Pope.
Bearings of Bearing this in mind, we may see how vast is the
ubiiityon change which the promulgation of this dogma has made
the world at ... .
large. m the position of every Roman Catholic throughout the
world, and in the relation of every civil society to the Church of
Rome. As there can be no political question of the slightest
moment that does not bear upon faith or morals, or both, the
Papal infallibility implies a claim of absolute sovereignty over the
whole range of human thought and action. As that which is
true with regard to it now was equally true in all time past, the
most extravagant pretensions, as they appear to us, of the mediaeval
popes, are now revived, re-affirmed, invested for ever with a divine
authority. The one thing which is beyond the power of the Pope
himself is to renounce or limit them. We may be quite sure that
the authors of this ecclesiastical revolution will never cease to
keep two objects steadily in view ; on the one hand, to conceal its
real nature and scope, so as to quiet the alarms of those who are
not prepared to surrender the rights of the state to the priest-
hood ;* on the other hand, to put the dogma in use; to make the
of herself, anterior to her history and independent of it. Her history can only be
learnt from herself.)
* The state of the case is explained by Cardinal Antonclli in a despatch to the
Nuncio at Taris (inserted in an English translation in Archbishop Manning's
CHARGES.
3()L
Papal sovereignty felt in every relation of public and private life.
It is true, that whatever comfort we can derive from the assurance,
that the Pope will not again assume the title of King or Lord of
England, or claim the right of repealing Acts of Parliament, that
we may securely enjoy. In general we may be sure that as long
as he can obtain the substance of power, he will be well content
to dispense with the form. But his agency will not be the less
real or effectual, because it is carried on underground and in the
dark. And it would be a great mistake to imagine that this
danger has been rendered less formidable by the recent course of
political events. The loss of the Pope's temporal dominion is
likely to give a stronger impulse to the zeal of his partisans, in
their endeavours to propagate his spiritual empire ; and tbe
unscrupulous arts which were employed to bring about the pro-
Appendix to his Pastoral Letter, 'The Vatican Council and its Definitions'), with a
clearness and openness which leaves nothing to desire : —
" The Church has never intended, nor now intends, to exercise any direct and
absolute power over the political rights of the State. Having received from God the
lofty mission of guiding men, whether individually or as congregated in society, to a
supernatural end, she has by that very fact the authority and the duty to judge
concerning the morality and justice of all acts, internal and external, in relation to
their conformity with the natural and divine law. And as no action, whether it be
ordained by a supreme power, or be freely elicited by an individual, can be exempt
from this character of morality and justice, so it happens that the judgment of
the Church, though falling directly on the morality of the acts, indirectly reaches
over everything wilh which that morality is conjoined. But this is not the same
thing as to interfere directly in political affairs." One who cannot see the meaning of
this, must be wilfully blind. But by way of illustration I subjoin an extract from
tbe " Revue des Deux Mondes," December I, 1871, p. '340 : — " Le Pape se considere
en Baviere comme un prince souverain ; il y publie ses propres decrets en depit des
lois positives du pays. L 'archet 't 'que de Bamberg lui-meme a publiquement avoue, le 24
mai dernier, que ' f episcopat bararois ne pretait serment que sous la reserve module de
toutes les lois de V Eg Use. Quand les eveques cherchent a nicr l'hostilitc du Catholicisme
Komain a l'egard de la societe civile, le ' Syllabus' leur donue un dementi. Homo
se considere comme en guerre ouverte avec les gouvernements europeens. Comme
preuve a l'appui, les journaux allemands ont reproduit le texte des instructions
secretes du Pape aux confesseurs du royaume d'ltalie publie par 1' Unita Cattolica au
mois d'avril, 1871 ; on yvoit que la cour du Vatican ordonnait aux confesseurs d'imposer
comme un devoir de conscience aux soklats italicns de deserter dis qu'ils le pourraient fuirc
sunn peril de la vie."
Friedrich, "Tagebucb," p. 243, relates: " Manning now makes it his business to
demonstrate to every one who will give him a hearing, that the infallibility relates
only to matters of dogma, not to the State. But even Count Trautmannsdorff
observed to him that the words were not simply quoad fidim but also quoad
mores."
302
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
limitation of the dogma, will not be spared in the application of
its logical consequences to all human concerns.
Rnmnn It has now become impossible for a Roman Catholic,
( Catholic
loyalty. consistently with the first principles of his religion, to
be a loyal subject of any government which is not itself subject to
the will of the Pope. Heretofore he might conscientiously profess
that his submission to the decrees of his Church was consistent
with his duty as a citizen. If he was pressed with the claims put
forward by such Popes as Innocent III., or Boniface VIII., to
temporal supremacy, he could argue with some degree of plausi-
bility, that they only asserted an authority which was conceded
to them by the consent of the age in which they lived. He could
repudiate the charge of a divided allegiance, as a calumny forged
for a pretext to cover the withholding of a right. But there is no
longer room for such a protest. His allegiance indeed can no
longer be truly said to be divided, but only because it is now
exclusively due to his spiritual sovereign, whose side he is bound
to take whenever the interests or the will of that sovereign come
into collision with the institutions of his earthly country. No
statesman can be worthy of the name, who overlooks or ignores
the gravity of the change which has been effected by the new
dogma, when he has to deal with proposals for a further develop-
ment of Roman Catholic influence, especially in the control of
education. We have received ample warning, that the adherents
of the Papacy will never be satisfied until the present barriers of
the constitution have been swept away, and the throne has been
made accessible to a sovereign pledged far more deeply than
James II. to obedience to the Pope.*
Probable Of the consequences which may be expected to result
gueneesof from this event, either abroad or at home, it would be
Papal infal-
libility, premature to speak. If in Germany it should lead to a
permanent schism, this will probably be due rather to the political
* Mr. Gladstone is reported to have said, in a speech delivered at King's College,
on the 14th May last : — " I must own that, admitting the incapacity of my under-
standing to grasp full)' what has occurred, the aspect of the recent decrees at Rome
appears to me too much to resemhle the proclamation of a perpetual war against the
progress and the movement of the human mind."
CHARGES.
303
than to the religious aspect of the question, though the one may
react upon the other. We watch the progress of the so-called
Old Catholic movement with friendly interest. The dignitaries
of our own Church who attended the Congress of Cologne, though
they did not appear in an official character as representatives of
the Anglican Church, probably expressed a very general feeling.
All our sympathy is with Bollinger and his friends, as against
the revolutionary party to which they are opposed: but we cannot
make their present position our own. The Council of Trent
indeed becomes comparatively respectable by the side of that of
the Vatican, and its proceedings a model of freedom and equity.
But we are not prepared to adopt its decrees ; and our rejection
of the new dogma does not reconcile us to the Creed of Pius IV.
As members of the Church of England, we must continue to
protest not only against the Pope's personal infallibility, but
against what we may call the infallibility of the Pope in
Council.
Whether in our own country any such gain will accrue to
the Church of Pome from the dogma bv an increase i»s influence
on our
of proselytes, as the Pope was led to expect by his Church.
English counsellors, still remains to be seen. I am far from
confident that it will not be attended with any such result. I
believe there are minds so constituted or trained that they not
only readily adopt the Jesuit maxim of the merit earned by the
sacrifice of the intellect, but find it a relief to transfer the whole
labour and responsibility of thought and conscience, in matters of
religion, to another, and so are prepared to welcome the doctrine
of an infallible teacher. But I own I should be painfully sur-
prised and disappointed if, on the whole, the effect of this innova-
tion among ourselves was not to widen and fix the gulph which
separates us from the Church of Rome, and to unite all members
of our own Communion, who have ever indeed been of us, in more
decided opposition to her claims, both new and old. I am far
from saying that this is a result desirable in itself, or one which
any Christian mind can contemplate with unmixed complacency.
But it may be the least of two evils. Speaking in the abstract,
304
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
we cannot but sympathise with every " Association formed for the
Unity of promotion of the Unity of Christendom." But we must
dommay^be not disguise from ourselves, that even so great a blessing
too dearly, would be purchased too dearly, or rather, that it would
be completely neutralized by a compromise of truth. And if,
even before the proclamation of the new dogma, it was difficult to
conceive how such a reunion could be brought about otherwise
than on terms of absolute submission to Rome, — such therefore
as we have no right to believe that any Church will ever accept, —
I need hardly observe how completely such a prospect has been
shut out by the position now taken up by the Church of Rome.
The hopelessness of the event indeed is no reason why it should
cease to be the object of our wishes and of our prayers. But it
may well be questioned, whether persons who, without any Divine
commission, undertake to co-operate in the working of such a
stupendous miracle, must not either be labouring under some
strange delusion as to the relation of means to the end they have
in view, or be using language which does not exactly convey their
real meaning and intention.
I now pass to subjects more specially affecting the Church at
home.
state and When we met last, the prospects of the Church, as to
prospects of m t
the church, its temporal position, were regarded by many of its
friends with much anxiety. Its adversaries were assailing it with
growing confidence, and with the machinery of a more compact
organization. The recent example of Ireland had awakened
hopes on the one side and fears on the other, which experience
alone could prove to be groundless. A sensible change has passed
upon this state of things. It is not that the uneasiness has been
succeeded by a sense of absolute security. Never was there a
time when it was less possible to count upon the duration of any
human institution, or to be sure that the forces which not long
ago astonished Europe by the outbreak of their destructive energy,
and by the full revelation of their direct antagonism to the first
principles of religion, morality, and social order, may not regain
their ascendancy, or at least be enabled to renew the struggle in
CHARGES.
305
which, their wildest excessess found apologists and advocates in
educated men among ourselves. But as to any danger specially
threatening the Church, her position appears to have become
relatively stronger, by the more decided failure of every fresh
assault. It is at least evident that for the present our chief, if
not our only, danger is that which threatens us from within. It
is not Disestablishment or Disendowment, but Disruption, Dis-
organization, and Disintegration, that we have immediately to
dread ; with the certainty that the evil which is incomparably
the greater in itself, would, if unchecked, sooner or later draw the
other after it. It is fit that we should look it calmly in the face,
that we may neither underrate nor unduly magnify its importance.
But no one who is not blind to the signs of the times can question
that it affords matter for serious apprehension.
If we would trace it to its origin, we see at once that it is not
the effect of any alteration in the doctrinal formularies origin of the
Disorgani-
which had long been received as a sufficient bond of nation,
union. Nor is it that now, for the first time in our history, the
Church has been divided into parties or schools, which have taken
different views of those formularies. There had never been a
period when one party, whose leaning was toward the Church of
Rome, and which held that the Reformation had been carried too
far, was not confronted by another which inclined towards the
views of the Continental Reformers, and thought that our Refor-
mation had not been carried far enough. But the great sacrifice
made to uniformity two centuries ago, though it did not efface
the old division of parties, was followed by a long period of tran-
quillity— the tranquillity indeed of stagnation, which we have
little reason to look back upon with regret — interrupted only by
occasional controversies of no general or permanent interest ;
useful perhaps, as preventing the diffusion of a deeper lethargy.
It has been within a very recent period that the breach between
the two parties has been so widened as to make it The breach
doubtful whether they can continue to find room within Wldened-
the same Church. It is a mistake, we have been informed, to
regard them as " merely differing aspects of the same religion,"
VOL. II. x
306
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
and not as logically " two distinct religions — two great camps,
Catholic and Protestant — quite as diverse from each other as
Judaism from Islam."* And we learn from another high
authority of the same school, that " the vast majority of our
countrymen belong exclusively to no party, but are simply Protes-
tant, with no other bond of union than a common dislike of
Popery." f
This hostility might have been the result of a development by
which either party had brought out its latent tendencies, so as to
Theresuitof Prov°ke more active antagonism ; but in fact I do not find
activity on ^hat there has been any such development on more than
one si e. Qne g-^e Qn Qf ^Q protestant or Evangelical party
there has been, so far as I am aware, no deliberate systematic inno-
vation, either in doctrine or practice, on the usage of centuries ;
rather perhaps signs of a growing disposition to make concessions
in things indifferent. But on the other side the development which
has been proceeding before our eyes during the last ten years, has
culminated in an approximation to Romish doctrine and ritual so
close as to render the remaining interval hardly perceptible to
common observers. Whether those who lead the van in this
movement regard the position which they have taken up as one
in which they could finally rest, or as a step toward an ulterior
object, it would be useless to inquire. But they do not profess to
be satisfied with the present amount of innovation, or to regard it
as anything more than a beginning and an instalment. They
make no secret of their desire and intention, so far as lies in their
power, to bring about a complete transformation of the Church of
England into the likeness of the Church of Borne in every par-
ticular short of immediate submission to the Pope.+
Designs of ^ i's necessary to bear this in mind, that we may form
1 a s " a correct estimate of the course taken by the opposite
parties. "We cannot but respect the courage and openness with
which the leaders of the Ritualist movement avow their designs,
* " The Two Religions : a Lecture by Richard F. Littledalc, LL.D.," p. 2.
t " Secular Judgments in Spiritual Matters." By Rev. Orby Shipley, M.A., p. 9.
X See Mr. Orby Shipley, " Cardinal Virtues," p. 247.
CHARGES.
307
and disclose their plan of operation. They inform us that their
party is engaged in a "crusade against Protestantism,"* and aims
at nothing less than " re-Catholicizing the Church of England ;t
and that with a view to this ultimate object, they are agitating
for Disestablishment."+ After this it must be our own fault if
we are not on our guard. But when the same persons put in " a
plea for Toleration," I do not know how to illustrate the character
of such a proposal more aptly than by the image suggested by
one of themselves, in the words I was just now quoting, of " two
great camps." It is as if one of these camps should send to the
other some such message as this : "We arc on our march to take
possession of your camp, and to make you our prisoners : but all
we desire is that you should let us alone, and should not attempt
to put any hindrance in our way."
It could hardly be supposed that such a transformation could
be accomplished in the name of the law without raising Litigation a
necessary
legal questions which must lead to litigation ; and the result-
result has been that extraordinary frequency of judicial proceed-
ings in cases of doctrine and ritual which we have recently
witnessed. All such litigation is to be most deeply deplored, as it
issues from a root of bitterness and inevitably aggravates the
bitterness from which it springs. But without assuming the
truth to lie exclusively on either side, and only giving both
parties equal credit for sincerity and earnestness, we must see that
the persons who instituted these proceedings, though to their
adversaries they might appear as persecutors, could not but look
upon themselves as simply acting on the defensive, in resistance
to an unprovoked and unlawful aggression, and for the purpose of
averting what to them seemed a tremendous evil. They could
not attach less importance to that which they regarded as error,
than their adversaries, who held it to be the truth. If the matter
* See Mr. Orby Shipley, " Cardinal Virtues," p. 174.
t Ibid., p. 220 : " Consider how much has to be done ere we stabilitate our con-
quests over Protestantism, or still more, ere we re-Catholicize the Church of
England."
j Ibid., p. 194: "The Catholic part)' in the Church are now agitating for dis-
establishment."
x 2
308
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
was too slight to justify the resort to prosecution, it could hardly
be weighty enough to be worth the risk of such consequences.
Claim of The Ritualists claim to be spiritually the lineal de-
Ritualists to . .. i • i
bedescen- scendants and consistent lollowers 01 those who m the
dauts of
Tractarians. ias(; generation set on foot the Oxford movement. But
the old Tractarians confined themselves to the inculcation of their
doctrines through the pulpit and the press, and attempted no
innovation in the forms of worship. When Ritualism first made
its appearance, the old Tractarians did not view it with favour.
They thought it premature, unseasonable, inexpedient, more likely
to check than to forward the progress of their movement. The
Ritualist thinks he has reason to complain of the neglect and
discouragement with which he has been treated by his spiritual
parents and national allies.* But there was a very plain and
Difference Droad line of separation between the Old and the New
ouiTndXew Tractarians. The authors of the Oxford movement said
Tractarians. many things which at that time were thought strange
and startling. But they were content to bear the responsibility
of their own opinions, and did not attempt to impose them upon
the Church. The later Ritual innovations made the clergyman's
public ministrations an instrument for investing his private
opinion with the sanction and authority of the Church. It was,
as I think, most justly observed by the final Court of Appeal in a
recent case : "If the minister be allowed to introduce at his own
will variations in the rites and ceremonies that seem to him to
interpret the doctrine of the service in a particular direction, the
service ceases to be what it was meant to be, common ground on
which all Church people may meet, though they differ about some
doctrines."! This was the abuse which the law was invoked to
* " The summons to make a stand against secular judgments in spiritual matters
at last has heen sounded by the remains of the old Oxford Tractarian party,
which had refused, oftentimes latterly refused, to be associated with, to support, or
even to follow, and still less to he enlisted into the ranks of the Ritual forces in the
Catholic Revival. Verily, we have had a sweet and ample revenge!" — Rev. Orhy
Shipley, u. s., p. 12.
f Judgment in Shepherd v. Bennett. The Court had just before laid down the
principle : " In the public or common prayers and devotional offices of the Church
all her members are expected and entitled to join ; it is necessary, therefore, that
such forms of worship as are prescribed by authority for general use should embody
CHARGES.
309
repress. Viewing it in this light, I cannot assent to the claim
which has heen laid on behalf of the Ritualists to superior for-
bearance and moderation, on the ground that they have instituted
no prosecutions for the numberless offences against obsolete
Canons and Rubrics, which might have afforded opportunity of
retaliating on their opponents.* This claim could only be
admitted if it could be shown that in the prosecutions instituted
against them no principle was involved, and no end sought but
the infliction of personal annoyance. It can hardly be considered
sound reasoning to argue that if one clergyman is left at liberty
to neglect an old Rubric, another must have an equal right to
introduce a new doctrine as the mind of the Church.f
The successive judgments of the final Court of Appeal which have
decided all the main questions that had arisen with regard Effects ot-
to public worship, appear to me to have been on the whole mcutsd(|the
strictly conservative, and, while repressing innovations Appeal,
which had given general offence, as violating the principle to which
I was just now referring, to have left as large a liberty of teaching
and practice as could be reasonably desired. But it cannot be
denied that the immediate effect has been to heighten and extend the
dissatisfaction which had been long felt by many with the constitu-
tion of the Court, and thus to create a common ground on which
the most advanced Ritualist may join hands with the most moderate
of the old Tractarian School, and even with many who belong to
neither. For few probably would be found prepared to contend
that this constitution is perfect and not liable to some grave
objections. It might seem as if such unanimity opened a prospect
those beliefs only which are assumed to be generally held by members of the
Church."
* In a Memorial to Convocation on the present aspect of the Ritual question, it is
observed : " The so-called Ritualists have never moved in the prosecution of any
nonconforming clergyman ; they do not consider uniformity in strict accordance
with the very letter of the law, after long disuse and neglect, either practicable or
expedient ; rather they believe that any attempt to enforce it would inevitably
involve a destruction of the peace of the Church — perhaps even a disruption of the
Church itself ; they only ask for justice, and that a small portion of the liberty so
largely extended to others may, more especially in consideration of the recent
judgments given in the cases above alluded to, be allowed to themselves."
t The fallacy is ably and fully exposed in Mr. Shaw's Essay, " Ritualism and
Uniformity," in " Principles at Stake."
;?io
BISHOP THIRLWALI/S
of speedy and peaceful solution of the difficulty, in a reconstruc-
tion of the tribunal, which should remedy all acknowledged
Tmpracti- defects. Unhappily we know that a great, perhaps the
pnreiyy greater, part of those who call most loudly for such a
Clerical o » r
court. change, would be content with none but a purely
clerical tribunal, possibly including a civilian or two as assessors,
to aid the Court with their advice on any merely legal questions
that might incidentally arise.* All their arguments would be
just as conclusive against the admission of a single lay member,
as against a Court composed entirely of laymen. A Court so con-
stituted might perhaps work well enough in a very small narrow
sect. In a Church established in this country it would be utterly
impracticable. And seeing this, those who are most eager for
Advoeac of cnanoe forward with hope to an approaching
Hsinnent by Disestablishment, which, as they believe, will restore
1 ' the liberty and privileges of the clergy, and replace
them in their proper position of independence and authority over
the laity. Whether the general tendency of the main current of
public opinion in this country, or in any part of the civilized
world, warrants such a hope, and does not rather insure bitter
disappointment to those who cherish it, I need not stop to inquire.
But it is saddening to think that such a feeling should have
sprung up among members of our Church, especially among the
clergy, and that not a few should have transferred their affection
and allegiance from the Church to which they still professedly
belong, to an ideal body, which never existed in time or space, which
they call the Catholic Church, and which, as it is purely a creature
of their own imagination, they can securely invoke, to sanction any
doctrine or practice which they may desire to introduce. t And it
it is still more painful to hear from one of eminent reputation and
great influence, that Churchmen, who think with him, " will to a
very great extent indeed find relief in co-operating with the political
forces which year by year more and more steadily are working
* See Rev. Orby Shipley : " Secular Judgments," and Preface to his Sermons on
the Four Cardinal Virtues.
f See the Rev. Orby Shipley, " Secular Judgments in Secular Matters," for "the
ten points in the Charter of Anglo-Catholic Ritual," p. 64.
CHARGES.
311
toward Disestablishment ; "* though, as we have been, assured,
this was not meant for a menace, but for the statement of a simple
fact, it was a statement manifestly implying approbation of the
course of proceeding which it foretold. I should be very loth to
censure persons who so express themselves, and whose judgment
may be clearer and their sense of duty keener than my own.
But I find it difficult to enter into their feelings. If any one is
convinced that it would be an advantage to the cause of religion,
if our Church was broken up into two or three sects, he has no
doubt a right to his opinion. But if not, when he deliberately
co-operates to bring about such a result, I do not understand how
he can be acquitted of a breach of charity, or of that self-will
which is the essence of heresy and schism. Still less can I
sympathize with those who, by word or example, instigate their
brethren to set the law at open defiance, and declare their own
intention of maintaining an attitude, not only of passive resistance
but of " active disobedience." t
Still we may find some comfort in the not unreasonable hope,
that the leaders of the so-called Catholic Revival, who _..
' Disap-
are chiefly responsible for all the evil and danger of Fh°Vbuikof
our present position, may have been deceived by the thecleiffy-
eagerness of their desires, and have mistaken their wishes for
realities. It is natural that they should wish to share so grave a
responsibility with as many as they can induce to take part in it.
But until experience shall have proved the contrary, I shall
continue to believe that the great body of the clergy of every
school may be credited with a sufficient measure of charity and
good sense, to prevent them from following such guidance. It
* Canon Liddon's Letter to the " Guardian," March 1, 1871.
t " I" the place of passive ohedience under useless and feeble protest, the party
as a party, it is not too early to affirm, with an unanimity hitherto unknown, is
prepared for active disobedience, animated by a spirit nearly akin to defiance." —
" Secular Judgments," p. 14.
Mr. Orby Shipley himself, however, is under no illusion as to the prospects of
the Disestablished Church. " I disbelieve," he says, " in anything but a change
in the contest of the Church Militant, a change from a contest against the State
without to a contest within, against Puritanism, against Latitudinarianism, against
Infidelity, and against what may be termed Lay-elcmentarianism in the Church." —
Sec. Judg., p. 168.
312
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
was the observation of a Churchman who was eminently qualified
by station and character to speak with peculiar authority on such
a subject, and the more as his general sympathies were on the
side of those from whom he differed on this point : " For the
clergy to join in a political crusade to accelerate their Dis-
establishment, would seem to me to argue such a dementation
both as to the act and the object, as would indeed almost cause
the most confident to despair. Hoc Ithacus relit, et magno
mercentur Atridm." *
Judgment The most recent Judgment of the Court of Final
of Appeal on Appeal, which has declared the legal construction of our
theEucha- . . .
rist. Formularies with regard to the Eucharist, has certainly
erred, if at all, on the side of freedom, in the exercise of that
indulgence which, according to the maxim of English law, is due
to the defendant — especially when he is unrepresented — in a
penal case. It has been generally felt that in this instance the
application of the maxim had been carried to its utmost length.
Perhaps the strongest recommendation of the Judgment to all
unprejudiced minds is the dissatisfaction with which it has been
received by some extreme partisans on both sides. It was
quite to be expected that the person whose language had given
occasion to the proceedings should scornfully repudiate the
authority of a Tribunal constituted only according to the law
of the land, and not acccording to his own opinions and wishes.
And we cannot be surprised that there should be found here
and there on the other side some who regard the lenity with
which he has been treated as connivance at error, or that it
should have been used as a handle for attack on the Church as
tolerating a plain avowal of distinctively Romish doctrine. I am
thankful both for what was said and for what was left unsaid :
* Sir John Coleridge, Letter to Canon Liddon, p. 22. He adds — expressing I
hope the sentiment of the great majority of Churchmen — " good and wise Christians
have thought, that considering how far we agree, and the mysterious nature of
those points as to which we differ, our unhappy differences are not such as to
prevent both parties from being united in one Church." Undoubtedly the differences
aro not such in themselves ; as is proved by the experience of centuries ; but what
they may be made to do by the spirit of partizanship, is unfortunately quite a
different question.
CHARGES.
313
for what was done, and for what was left undone. We may
indeed think it matter of regret, that it should have been deemed
necessary to declare that Hooker's doctrine on the Eucharist is
admissible in the Church of England. But as the language of
the Judge in the Court below intimated that this was a question-
able point, it was highly desirable that all doubt should be
removed by the distinct statement that the Church " does not by
her Articles and Formularies affirm or require her ministers to
accept any presence of Christ in that ordinance which is not a
presence to the soul of the faithful receiver." On the other hand,
it was no less desirable to show that this statement is not to be
considered as so exhaustive that no other form of expression can
be allowed rightly to describe the mystery, or that anyone is
forbidden to speak of it in different terms, not inconsistent with
the truth which he is required to affirm. No doubt this latitude,
like all liberty, may be abused. And it will never be possible
to prevent anyone from availing himself of the ambiguity of
language, and of the mysteriousness of the subject, to come
indefinitely near to the distinct avowal of Romish doctrine. But
I hardly think that the success of the attempt in this case has
been such as to invite anyone to repeat the experiment.
In one or two points indeed the maxim by which the defendant
in a penal case is entitled to the benefit of a doubt,
r ' Views of the
may seem to have been strained somewhat beyond its of/the visi-
reasonable limits. The defendant's original statement blePresence-
affirmed a " visible presence of our Lord upon the altars of our
churches." It seems that a more judicious friend led him to
observe that this language went too far, even beyond the Romish
doctrine of the Real Presence, and he was thus induced to
substitute a different expression. But he took care to explain
that he meant precisely the same thing by both statements. It
might therefore have seemed that he wished to be understood as
continuing to maintain that complete identification of our Lord's
Body and Blood with the Bread and Wine which is implied in the
phrase "visible presence." The Judge in the Court of Arches
had no hesitation in pronouncing that the expression " visible
314
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
presence of our Lord upon the altars of our churches," is in its
plain meaning at variance w ith all the Formularies of our Church
upon the subject, at variance with the language of the Service of
the Holy Communion, of the Twenty-eighth Article, and of the
Catechism ; and that the doctrine which it expresses overthroweth
the nature of a Sacrament even more than Transubstantiation." *
But the Defendant never explained how the sense in which he
used the original words differed from that which the Judge
considered as their plain meaning ; or, if his language was suscep-
tible of more than one construction, which it was that "passed
through his mind in writing." And having expressed the same
thought in two different forms of words, the one perfectly plain
and simple, the other in the highest degree obscure and ambiguous,
he was allowed the privilege of expounding that which was unmis-
takably erroneous by that which might mean anything or nothing.
_ .. „ It was perhaps a still more arduous achievement of
Charitable r r
Honso^the charitable interpretation, and one which was not accom-
plished without doubts and division of opinion in the
Court, to suppose that one who "adored Christ present in the
Sacrament under the form of bread and wine, believing that
under their veil is the sacred Body and Blood of Jesus Christ,"
might mean something essentially differing from the statement,
that he " adored the consecrated elements believing Christ to be
in them, and that His Body and Blood are under their veil ; "
and this notwithstanding His own assurance that the two expres-
sions were intended by Him to convey precisely the same
meaning. It is at least a distinction which it requires a very
high degree of legal acumen to perceive. But I am glad that a
majority of the Judicial Committee found it impossible to come to
this conclusion, and were thus enabled to avoid the necessity of
investing the Defendant with the halo of martyrdom. The legal
condemnation could only have weakened the force of the moral
* Probably however it is no more than was meant by Mr. Orby Shipley, when he
speaks of " God's Presence now shortly to be manifested on His Altar." " Card.
Virtues," p. 71. It is perhaps to be taken as one of the points in which " Catholic "
doctrine does not yet exactly coincide with that of Rome. An old Latin Hymn on
the Sacrament began : Adoro te devote latent Dcitas, Qua: sub his figv.ris vcre latitas.
CHARGES.
315
sentence in which both Courts entirely concurred. The one
thought that " if a private clergyman steps out of the ordinary
course of parochial duty, to discharge the office of a public writer
upon the most awful mystery of our holy religion, the least that
our Church has a right to expect from him, is the knowledge and
erudition of a theologian, and the use of the most careful and
well-considered language." The other was of opinion, " that
there might have been expected from a theologian dealing with
this subject, if not a charitable regard for the feelings of others,
at least a careful preparation and an exactness in the use of
terms." No doubt in itself a very reasonable expectation ; but
one which has been so often disappointed, that it can hardly be
indulged without some degree of presumption.
It was while the questions which have since been decided by
successive judgments were still agitating the public mind, Thg Rq ^
that the Royal Commission was issued for " inquiring onPuMioion
into the differences of practice in Public "Worship, with Worship-
a view to secure general uniformity in such matters as might be
deemed essential," by means of peaceful conference. This however
was done only after a suit had already been commenced in one case,
and the issuing of the Commission was not allowed to suspend the
course of the legal proceedings. It was clearly desirable that the
authority of Parliament should not be invoked for the settlement
of any question which was within the jurisdiction of a legal
tribunal ; and so there is no reason to regret that the Ornaments
Rubric, though it had been the chief occasion of the
... Its results.
whole agitation which it was the object of the Commis-
sion to quiet, was left untouched. The fact itself seems to show that
it would have been hardly possible, even if the Commissioners could
have come to an agreement on this point, to bring any action of
the Legislature to bear upon it without risk of very inconvenient
consequences. But notwithstanding its failure in this respect — one
which might have been anticipated from the manner in which the
Commission was composed — it cannot be said to have proved abor-
tive. It was indeed always viewed with dislike and suspicion by
that section of Churchmen which is jealous of all intervention of
316
BISHOP THIRLWALL's
the Laity in ecclesiastical matters, except as ministering to the
Clergy ; and it was to be expected that its work would be severely
criticised. But I hope it will be found not to have laboured in
vain, and that its recommendations, both as to the Rubrics and the
Lectionary, when carried into effect, will prove a great gain to the
Church. I have little doubt that the new Table of Lessons will
make its way to almost universal acceptance long before the term
allowed for retaining the old one has expired.
Com « A still greater benefit will, I believe, have accrued to
sionbof the" *ne Church, whenever the Committee appointed by the
Southern Convocation for the revision of the Authorized
Version of the Bible shall have completed its task. The preli-
minary objections raised to the undertaking had been met by
anticipation, when a like work was undertaken by St. Jerome.*
In a time when minds were less heated by controversy, it would
have been hardly possible to question the desirableness of en-
abling the English reader to reap the benefit of the progress
which has been made in the course of the last two centuries in the
interpretation of Scripture. The most important step for ensuring
the ultimate success of the work was taken when it was placed on
a broad Catholic basis, by the resolution, " that the members of
the Committee of Revision should be at liberty to invite the co-
operation of any eminent for scholarship, to whatever nation or
religious body they may belong ; " and by a subsequent declaration
unanimously adopted by the Upper House, that " this House does
its guiding n°t intend to give the slightest sanction or countenance
principle. ^o ^e 0pinjorij tb.at the members of the Revision Com-
panies ought to be guided by any other principle than the desire to
bring the translation as near as they can to the sense of the original
texts ; but, on the contrary, regards it as their duty to keep
themselves as much as possible on their guard against any bias of
preconceived opinions, or theological tenets, in the work of revision."
That both Companies will faithfully adhere to this principle, I feel
fully assured by the opportunities I have enjoyed of observing the
spirit in which they have addressed themselves to their work. I
* See Professor Lightfuot. " On a fresh Revision of the English Kew/Teslament."
CHARGES.
317
am also able to testify, so far as ray own experience has reached,
to the groundlessness of the apprehensions which have been
expressed, either of needless alteration, or of the introduction of
modern phraseology, not in harmony with the style of the Author-
ized Version. If in this respect there be any room for question,
it is whether the Revisers may not sometimes have carried their
scruples on the conservative side to an excess. It is no doubt to
be lamented that they have been deprived of the aid of some
eminent scholars, through causes which would have rendered such
an undertaking impossible at any time. But I do not believe that
the Revised Version will be found behind its age, or that anyone
will seek in it in vain for the ripest fruit of modern Biblical
scholarship. The Revisers would not be worthy of their office if
they did not court the utmost severity of candid criticism, and
their work will have to make its way by its own merits. There
is no fear of its being imposed by authority, any more than this
was the case with the preceding revisions of St. Jerome and the
Authorized Version itself. "Whenever it takes the place of that
now in use it will be simply on the ground of its intrinsic
superiority.
The work of the Ritual Commissioners unavoidably drew their
attention to the Rubric of the Athanasian Creed, and TheAthana-
various opinions were expressed, and proposals discussed, 8ianCreed-
with regard to it. It is important to keep this fact in mind,
because it has apparently been forgotten or ignored by some who
have spoken as if they believed that the attempts which have been
made to procure some alteration in the manner of dealing with it
had been prompted by a desire to banish its doctrine from the faith
of the Church.* How such a design could have entered any sane
* Archdeacon Denison, in a letter to " The Times " of August 28th, has unveiled a
" plot, in which Broad Church and Low Church — the last in its despair— have joined
hands to fight against the Creeds." He has discovered that "the astute contrivers
of the plot," as " it would not have answered their purpose to go straight to their
work," " thought they saw a convenient hy-way through the Fourth Eeport of the
Royal Commission." The superiority of the clerical over the lay intellect in the
detection of deep-laid plots, is placed in strong relief by a letter to the same journal
of Sept. 18, from Lord Redesdale, in which his Lordship, speaking of the secessions
which have been threatened in the event of the use of the Athanasian Creed being
declared optional, is simple enough to say, that " so long as the first four sentences of
318
BISHOP THIRLVALL's
mind as long as the Nicene Creed, the Te Deum, and suffrages of
the Litany, form part of our weekly service, and the collect for
Trinity Sunday retains its place, it is not easy to conceive. But
it is at least certain that the character of the persons who have
expressed a desire for the alteration ought to have secured them
from suspicion of such a design. The dispute was not between
advocates and impugners of the doctrine, but between those who
did and those who did not think the Creed suited for recitation in
public worship. To fasten on an opponent an opinion which he
disavows, in order to turn it into an argument against him, is a
controversial artifice which in my judgment no eminence of station,
no depth of learning, no power of eloquence, can make allowable.
In the present case it has been freely practised, and I believe with
the effect of misleading or intimidating many of the Clergy, who
have been led to fear either that they might be unwittingly con-
tributing to the success of an attempt most repugnant to their
deepest convictions, or might incur the suspicion and obloquy of
favouring it in their hearts.
The prac- The practical question was entirelv independent of the
tical ques-
tion. age and authorship of the Creed, and of the soundness of
its doctrine. That could no more prove its suitableness for reci-
tation in public worship, than that of the Thirty-nine Articles.*
But questions have arisen out of the discussion far more important
than that out of which they arose, because deeply affecting the
rights of Churches, the liberty of individual consciences, and
fundamental truths of morality. It is on this account that I feel
myself constrained to dwell upon it at somewhat greater length
than I shoidd otherwise have thought necessary.
I hold that every National Church has a right to regulate
its forms of public worship, and to make any change which it
may deem expedient even in its most ancient usages. "Whether
the Litany are used as at present in every Church on ever}' Sunday, it is absurd to
consider that doctrine would be abandoned by such permission, and wrong to act in
a manner which may induce others to believe that it would do so." It must be
presumed that his Lordship had not seen the Archdeacon's revelation.
* This was written before I had seen Canon Perowne's Sermon on the Athanasian
Creed, in which (p. 27) he makes the same remark.
CHARGES.
a document which has been variously described as a Creed, as
an Exposition, as a Hymn, as a Homily,* and as a Pandect,f
shall be publicly recited, and how often in the year, is Eight of
• i i /-Yi i Churches to
a point on which the Church must be as competent to regulate
their forms
judge as on any of her Rubrics. Assertions, however of worship,
peremptory, that its omission from public worship implies rejec-
tion of any truth contained in it, as they are incapable of proof,
are sufficiently refuted by a simple contradiction. The Article
which affirms that it " may be proved by most certain warrant of
Holy Scripture," leaves the use which may be made of it perfectly
open to the decision of the Church. It is a simple question of
Christian prudence and charity. Nor can the Article be fairly
held to preclude any interpretation which may commend itself to
an}rone's mind, either on historical or on internal evidence, such
as the opinion held by several eminent persons, that the damnatory
clauses are the setting of the exposition, and no part of the exposi-
tion itself. The Article is unfairly treated when it is construed as
if it was a trap laid for tender and timorous consciences, excluding
all discrimination between different portions of the Creed in their
relation to Scripture.* It cannot pledge anyone who subscribes it
to any higher estimate of the Creed than was formed by Jeremy
Taylor. Yiews widely differing from one another in this respect
may be held with perfect consistency by persons who, with him,
accept its contents as consonant with Scripture, that is, as capable
* " The Admonitory Clauses of the Church's Ilomiletical Creed." A letter to the
Rev. C. J. Vaughan by Archdeacon Freeman.
t Bishop Ellicott's New Translation of the Athanasian Creed. By Rev. R. C.
Malan.
{ Dr. Pusey, in a letter to "The Times," dated Mayence, Aug. 10, has promulged
a new Canon of discipline for the Clergy. He writes : " Clergymen have no plea to
demand a change, for of their own free will and choice they received Holy Orders
in a Church which recites the Athanasian Creed in her service." According to Dr.
Pusey therefore no one has a light to enter into Holy Orders in the Church of
England if he believes that any Rubric of the Prayer-Book is capable of improvement,
still less to join in any attempt to bring about such improvement. It is a comfort to
be sure that there is no immediate danger of such a degrading and pernicious yoke
of bondage being laid upon the Clergy. But it is instructive to learn that there is a
party which wants, not the will, but only the power to impose it, and that it is tho
same which in the meanwhile is putting forth " Pleas for Toleration." This is one of
tho glories reserved for the Disestablished Church of the Future, as it is pictured by
some imaginations.
320
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
of being proved, or at least incapable of being disproved by
Scriptural testimony.
History of Every genuine feeling of attacbment to the Creed,
the Creed. gr0unded on habit and early associations, is entitled to
our sympathy and respect, but it cannot require that we should
shut our eyes to historical facts. The veneration with which we
might naturally regard a document which has come down to us
from a very remote antiquity must be a little tempered by the
reflection that, according to the earliest date that can with any
probability be assigned to its authorship, it was the product of a
very evil and unhappy time. The interval between the first and
the fourth General Council — especially as it drew near to its close
— was a period to which it is impossible for any thoughtful
Christian to look back without sorrow and shame. It was no doubt
a period of great intellectual activity, and adorned by several
illustrious names. But it was also marked by a rapid decline of
spiritual life in the Church. The leading minds of the age were
absorbed in barren speculation on inscrutable mysteries, unre-
strained by any misgivings as to the capacity of the human
understanding. The misguided policy of the Imperial government,
swayed by motives partly secular, partly religious, was bent on
fixing a hard fast line of orthodoxy, as well in the interest of
public tranquillity, as for the satisfaction of personal prejudices
cherished by the rulers. Thus all the power of the State was
exerted to fan the flame of theological controversy, to exasperate
and envenom the spirit of discord by the distribution of temporal
rewards and penalties, and to animate the combatants by the hope
of Imperial favour, and the dread of Imperial displeasure, when
that favour meant wealth, dignity, and power ; that displeasure,
degradation, exile, imprisonment, and lingering death. An ill-
chosen phrase in a sermon, interpreted by an unscrupulous adver-
sary, was enough to convulse society. The most solemn assemblies
of the Church were desecrated by scenes of disgraceful tumult and
brutal violence. It was then possible for such a man as Cyril of
Alexandria, the type of a thoroughly worldly, ambitious, remorse-
less, unprincipled Churchman, to earn the title of a Saint. This
CHARGES.
321
was the period in which the invention of the unfortunate ex-
pression Qeoroicos gave the strongest impulse to that Mariolatry
which has culminated in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.
To this period belongs the upgrowth of that monastic system which
disfigured the Eastern Church with the wildest fanaticism, and the
most degrading superstition. This was the age in which what little
more than half a century before was the Church of the Martyrs,
began to shed the blood of heretics. From it we have inherited much
of that phraseology which has ever since inflamed the fierceness of
theological hatred, by the confusion of error with moral delinquency.
I cannot but consider that freer use of unscriptural metaphysical
terms, which distinguishes the Athanasian from the causes of its
deteriora-
earlier Creeds, as another sign of progressive deterioration. tion-
" The Nicene Creed itself," observes a very learned ecclesiastical
historian,* " had many opponents in the East, partly because some
believed that they found Sabellianism in the expression ofxoovoios,
partly because it was thought wrong to lay down as Church doc-
trine such more precise definitions of that which until then had
been undefined." Athanasius endeavoured to meet the objections
which had been raised to the Nicene Creed on this ground by an
elaborate apology, but only on the plea of absolute necessity.! The
introduction of such terms was evidently in his view a blemish,
though as he thought inevitable. Such was the feeling of the Nicene
Fathers themselves. " It is evident," writes another historian who
had devoted special study to this period, " how unwillingly they
had recourse to the decreeing of a formula which was not contained
literally in Scripture, and that it was only under the constraint of
the extremest necessity that they set forth a formula at all." +
But the sufficiency of the Nicene Creed was frequently and
strenuously asserted by AthanasiusJ to whom, nevertheless, it
would appear that some persons still ascribe the authorship of that
which bears his name.
Until the liberties of the Clergy have been straitened in a way
which I hope I may not live to witness, no clergyman need scruple
* Gieseler, i., p. 373.
t Mohler, Athanasius der Grosse, p. 210.
VOL. II. Y
t See Appendix, note A.
§ See note B, in the Appendix.
322
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
to adopt the language in which Jeremy Taylor pithily stated
itsotjec- what so many feel as the twofold objection to the
rionable J
clauses. public use of the Creed, the rigour of the damnatory
clauses, and the metaphysical character of its distinguishing pro-
positions.* But every one has an equal right to take a different
view of the subject, and it would not be surprising if some new
light had been thrown on each branch of the question by the
active discussion it has lately undergone. The desire which has
been shown to veil or mitigate the harshness of the Damnatory
Clauses, and to exchange that epithot for one less jarring on the
ear, would have been hailed with greater satisfaction by those who
dislike them, if it had not turned out that the thing was to be
retained in its utmost rigour under a milder name, or with some
explanation which would leave it just as it was. What is gained
by the substitution of the term monitory, or learning, I have never
been able to understand. It seems to me only to perplex the
question, without affording the slightest relief to those who are
offended by the thing. None, I believe, ever doubted that the
condemnation is general, and not applied to any particular case.
The question has not been who are the offenders, but what is the
offence which incurs the sentence of everlasting perdition. These
clauses have been defended on various grounds, which seem to
imply a wide divergency of views among those who maintain
One view of them. By some they are simply taken in their natural
and obvious sense, and are thought to be sufficiently
justified by our Lord's words at the close of S. Mark's Gospel :
the difference of the conditions recorded by the Evangelist from
those under which the threat is denounced in the Creed — the
miraculous confirmation of the Apostolical message, and the Divine
co-operation, "the Lord working with them," being overlooked
or ignored, as if they were of no importance, and did not at all
affect the responsibility of the hearers.
According to another view, the everlasting perdition is simply
* Lib. of Proph., rol. vii., p. 491, ed. Heber : "Nothing there but damnation
and perishing everlastingly, unless the article of the Trinity be believed, as it is there
with curiosity and minute particularities explained."
CHARGES.
323
the inevitable consequence of the abuse of human freewill.
We are informed indeed that the damnatory clauses " can- Another
not possibly apply to any but such as wilfully deprave view'
the Faith, since the conscious consent of the will is essential to
any act of sin." * But, together with this most certain and
precious truth,! we are required to accept the paradox, that " it
is as reprehensible to reject any part of the contents of Revela-
tion as it is to break any part of the moral law." X No doubt
the reception of spiritual truth is often impeded by prejudices
arising out of the perverse bias of a depraved will. But to main-
tain that this is always the case, that there is no such thing as
honest, disinterested unbelief, is an arbitrary assumption, incap-
able of proof, and apparently contradicted by large experience.
Yet it is only on this assumption that it seems possible to justify
the assertion which has been advanced by some eminent Divines
in the course of the present controversy, without any qualification,
that unbelief is in itself sin. To me this doctrine appears Considered
in relation
to be subversive of the first principles of religion and to unbelief,
morality. I can conceive no greater dishonour cast on the Divine
character than is implied in the supposition that any one is
responsible in the sight of God for intellectual any more than for
physical infirmity. And I can hardly doubt that the persons
who, in the heat of controversy, have been led to affirm this
revolting paradox, unconsciously qualified it by a tacit reservation
which implied some act of the will as the cause of the unbelief. §
* The "Damnatory Clauses" of the Athanasian Creed rationally explained in a
letter to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P., by the Rev. Malcolm MacColl,
j>. 80. Some statements of this work will he found examined in the Appendix, notes
B and C.
t It was more briefly, and not less forcibly expressed by Jeremy Taylor, sup.
p. 466 : " No man is a heretic against his will."
I Ibid., p. 88, and p. 163: "I shall continue, till bettor informed, to believe that
he who deliberately rejects an article of faith, transgresses God's commandments as
really, and opposes His will as effectually, as the man who breaks the moral law."
The quiet assumption, necessary to reconcile this assertion with morality and common
sense, as well as with the writer's previous statement at p. 80, that the person who
rejects the article of faith, does so, knowing or believing it to be divinely revealed,
will not escape the attention of the intelligent reader.
§ Our Lord's complaint against the Jews was, " Ye will not come to me, that ye
uiight have life." — John v. 40 ov QfXtrt tXQilv.
Y 2
324
BISHOP THIRL WALL5 8
The exception which has been made to the operation of the
Damnatory Clauses by some other learned persons,* in favour of
And to m " those who bjr involuntary ignorance or invincible pre-
Ignomnle judice are hindered from accepting the faith declared in
cibiepr^u- the Creed," does not seem to differ essentially from that
dice.
which was proposed by the Ritual Commission: "that
the condemnations are to be understood as a solemn warning of
the peril of those who wilfully reject the Catholic Faith." In
what sense anyone can be properly said wilfully to reject the
truth is hard to understand. He may wilfully refuse to acknow-
ledge what he believes to be true, but he cannot inwardly reject
it. He may be unfaithful to his convictions, but he cannot alter
them at his pleasure. The exception manifestly proceeds on the
arbitrary assumption that the fault rests not in the intellect but in
the will. And it does not seem to help us much if the proposition
is modified by the statement, that men " are responsible for not
believing wherever sufficient evidence of Divine Truth is furnished
to them." f If the sufficiency relates to anyone else than the
person to whom the evidence is offered, since that which is suf-
ficient for one may not be sufficient for another, the statement is
clearly irrelevant. But if that which is furnished is sufficient for
the person himself, then it is out of his power inwardly to reject
it. The inward acceptance is the test and the only possible test
of the sufficiency. There can be neither sin nor merit in the
withholding our assent from that which we do not believe to be
true, as it is impossible for anyone to act otherwise. Whether
* The Oxford Professors of Divinity.
t Dean Goulbum's Second Discourse on the Athanasian Creed. The whole passage,
p. 32, runs : " Like the clauses in the Creed, the warnings of these two passages
(John viii. 24, and iii. 36) are directed, not against wrong conduct, but against unbelief,
showing clearly that unbelief is a sin, and that men are responsible for not believing,
wherever sufficient evidence of Divine Truth is furnished to them." It is to be
regretted that the Dean did not explain how the sin for which men are responsible can
be committed without wrong conduct. To me the passages which he cites from
S. John seem quite irrelevant. In John viii. 24, the a/iaprlai are evidently quite
distinct from the airiaria, the effect of which is only that the sinner will be left to
die in his unrepented sins. In the other passage, as Meyer observes, the fiivu implies
thatth^ vTath of God was not the consequence of the imbelief, but had been previously
incurred. A most lucid exposure of the fallacy will be found in the Charge of the
Bishop of Peterborough, pp. 59 — 65.
CHARGES.
325
unbelief is sinful must depend, not on the nature or importance
of the doctrine propounded, but on the state of the un- mat con_
believing soul. That state is only transitory. All Chris- ^Mness of
tians would agree that eyes which are closed against the unbelief-
truth by an honest doubt will be opened to it in the light of the
last J udgment. The only difference is, that some find it agreeable
to their conceptions of the Divine Justice to believe that this final
disclosure will be accompanied with a sentence of eternal perdi-
tion, while others shrink with horror from the thought of such a
decree. But the more obscure, speculative, and mysterious the
doctrine, and the less immediately it is connected with practice,
the less reason is there for imputing the rejection of it to any
sinful motive. Strangely as it may 60und to those who have been
used to hear heresy described as the most atrocious of crimes,
there is no fair pretence for doubting that the errors of Arius and
Apollinaris, of Nestorius and Eutyches, whatever may have been
the weakness and faultiness of their characters in other respects,
were purely intellectual, and that they were only misled by their
zeal for the glory of God and the honour of Christ into taking one
part or side of the truth for the whole.
The Athanasian Creed has the advantage of embodying the sub-
stance of the earlier Creeds ; and the Nicene, which had characteris-
tics of tho
so long appeared a sufficient exposition of the Christian Creed-
faith, must be considered as the most valuable part of the later one.
That which is most peculiar to it is described by Jeremy Taylor
as " explaining the Article of the Trinity with curiosity and
minute particularities." And it had been generally thought that
its metaphysical terminology was ill-adapted to the intellectual
capacity of the great bulk of our ordinary congregations. I can-
not help retaining that opinion. "Wo have been informed indeed
from the highest authority, that the savages of New Zealand — an
intelligent race, though still in a low stage of civilization — find
little or no difficulty in those clauses of the Creed which, to the
minds of many among ourselves, including some eminent Divines,
appear very abstruse and obscure.* I do not question the fact,
* Speech of the Bishop of Lichfield, reported in tho " Guardian " of 8th May.
326
Bisuor thielwall's
even if it ultimately rests on the testimony of the New Zealunders
themselves ; for I think I have observed that the persons who are
various esti- least apt to stumble at any passage of a difficult work
mates of it. arg ajwayg f^Qgg w]10 are most capable of understand-
ing it. But among those who are not satisfied with Jeremy Taylor's
description, there is a notable variety of language. Some are con-
tent to regard the things which he calls " minute particularities "
as a safeguard, a fence, and a bulwark, of the main doctrine, while
others speak of them as " the most central truths of the Faith." *
I will only observe that, if they are indeed such, the great body
of the Clergy must have grievously neglected a most important
part of their duty as preachers of the Gospel. For they have
acted almost universally — if indeed there be any exception — as
if they thought that the subject belonged more properly to the
lecture rooms of Professors of Ecclesiastical History than to the
pulpit. I more than suspect that this has been the case with those
whom I am now addressing. But if it be so, I am not prepared
to say that they have withheld from their hearers any saving
truth ; and I doubt whether, if they were to dwell more frequently
on the errors of the old heresiarchs, whose names have probably
hitherto been heard by few in their congregations, and to show
how the statements of the Athanasian Creed were pointed against
them, this revival of long defunct controversies, however it might
raise their reputation for learning, would be likely to interest or
edify their people more than the topics on which they are now
used to enlarge. How far it might usefully find a place in
missionary work among some heathen races is another matter, but
wholly irrelevant to the present question.!
* See a Memorial to Convocation of the English Church Union.
t A passage from a Charge of the lamented Bishop Cotton has become almost
classical, as an argument in favour of the continued public recitation of the Athana-
sian Creed. It was cited at length in the Debate in the Upper House of Convocation
on the 3rd of May, and is inserted by Mr. MacColl in his Appendix. Yet it could
never have been quoted as in the remotest degree bearing upon the question, if it
had not been arbitrarily assumed that the transfer of the Creed to a different part of
tho Prayer-Book — though much less than that would satisfy most objectors — was
the same thing as " expunging it from the records of our Church." Equally irrele-
vant is the story of missionary experience related by Bishop Macdougal. Whether
the missionaiy teaching of a Protestant Church is best drawn from any other source
CHARGES.
3:27
Other advocates of the Damnatory Clauses have taken a line of
apology different from that which we were just now con- TheDamn .
sidering, contending, though not all from the same point n"LSer-3es
of view, that they have been entirely misunderstood. 8 00 '
One thinks that the case to which they refer is not that of unbe-
lievers, but of persons who have accepted the orthodox faith, and
are charitably exhorted to hold it fast, and warned against the
danger of apostasy.* Whether this is really consistent with the
language of the Creed, may be questioned; but it clearly proceeds
on the same supposition, that dissent from the doctrine can only
be the effect of moral depravity. Another learned and able
writer, t whose moral sense was shocked by the supposition that
" assent to a speculative doctrine could be made the indispensable
pre- requisite of eternal happiness," persuaded himself that the
words only meant, " the Catholic Faith is a necessary preliminary
for a saving communion with the Church, and the keeping that
faith to the end in a corresponding life is the necessary condition
of everlasting salvation." J The proposition so worded would
probably have given no offence to any. But it is now ^ lana_
many years since this discovery was published, and we ge°nesra^y
are witnessing how little it has been generally accepted ^p*6 ■
as a solution of the difficulty ; and I see no sign that any of the
than Scripture, is another question. But the use of the Creed for elucidation of
doctrine, would be exactly the same in whatever part of the Prayer-Book it is found.
* See Mr. Vogan in the " Guardian," of 22nd May, and compare, " Canones Concil.
Toletani," iv., 1.
t Dr. Donaldson, "Christian Orthodoxy," p. 473.
I Dr. Donaldson (u. s., p. 465) observes that Hilary of Aries, having before his eyes
the contrast lamented by Salvian, between the licentiousness of the Catholics and
the pure lives of the Arian Visigoths, "could not but feel that Christianity required
something more than a precise form of sound doctrine ; and ho has left to the Church
a Symbol or Creed, not less distinguished from other documents of the same class by
the logical accuracy of its theological statements than by the earnestness with which
it insists on the necessity of a sober, righteous, and godly life." I very much doubt
that the clauses to which he refers had any such origin. I strongly suspect that they
had a more specific dogmatical application. They seem to have been pointed against
an antinomian heresy, of which S. Augustine speaks in a passage quoted by Gieseler
(1., p. 437, n.) from ep. 214. Some, he says, "sic gratiam pnedicant, ut negeut
hominis esse liberum aibitriuin, et quod est gravius, dicant, quod in die judicii nun sit
rtdditurus Deus unicuique secundum opera ejus." In contradiction to this doctrine, the
Creed affirms that, at Christ's coming, all men reddituri sunt de fuelis propnis
rationtm.
328
BISHOP THIELWALL'S
others Lave made a deeper impression upon public opinion in the
way of reconciling it with the obnoxious clauses, even if they
have not rather provoked some degree of resentment, as sophistical
glosses, reflecting on the understanding of those to whom tbcy
are addressed. I cannot anticipate any happier result from the
researches which have been instituted with a view to emendation
in the text of the Creed. However interesting they may be to
the learned, I do not expect that they will be commonly believed
to have made any material change in the state of the question.
Xo issue could be less satisfactory- than an appeal to a
Compromise - rr
suggested, numerical majority, especially as it would probably be
found that the opinion prevailing among the Clergy is opposed to
the general wishes of the Laity. The case is one in which, as no
principle is involved unless it be one which has been fabricated
for the occasion, a compromise seems eminently desirable, and for
men of good will, of no insurmountable difficulty. It has indeed
been called for by the admissions of most of those who, though
strenuous advocates of the Creed, have acknowledged the need of
some kind of qualifying explanation. But the temper which has
been displayed in the menaces of secession which some have
thought it not unbecoming to brandish, and which have supplied
others with their strongest argument, must prevent us from
cherishing any very sanguine hope of this kind. The reasonable-
ness and decency of such a menace can only be fully appreciated
when we remember that for eight or nine centuries, the Creed was
never heard in the services of the Church, and was first introduced
as a part of monastic devotion in the thickest darkness of the
Middle Ages. That it should have been possible for persons to
whom all look up with respect, to hold out such a threat, is
both a calamity in itself and one of the most saddening signs of
the times.
. We have however been seasonablv reminded by an
The Laity J J
b?\helf-ei eminent lay churchman,* that it is not the Clergy who
nunciations. are affecte(j jjy recitation of the Damnatory Clauses ;
but the Laity, who have the remedy in their own hands, since,
* Lord Redesdale, in the above-cited letter to " The Times."
CHARGES.
329
if they disapprove of the responses assigned to them they can-
not be compelled to utter them. And, in fact, I believe it would
be found on inquiry, that in the great majority of our parish
churches, the entire responsibility of these tremendous denuncia-
tions devolves upon the Clerk, whose voice alone breaks the
silence which follows the Minister's declarations of orthodox
doctrine. Tinder these circumstances, that the difference of
opinion on this question should be allowed to make a breach in
the Church whatever might be its extent, would be something
worse than a calamity ; — it would be a perpetual shame and re-
proach. If this evil can only be averted by a concession on one
side or the other, I must say that I should be very much more
loth to accept a concession extorted by menaces such as we have
heard, than to make it. When one of two fellow-travellers
threatens to part company if his wishes are not complied with on
a point which to an intelligent bystander appears absurdly trifling,
it seems to me that the more dignified course is to let him, for
once at least, have his way. We must lament that persons of
high position in the Church, and of eminent ability and The mode of
character, should have been betrayed by the heat of the contro-
versy depre-
controversy into a course of proceeding, for which we cateii-
can hardly find a fitter epithet than childish; but to imitate it
would certainly not be more manly. If wc think that they have
shown a deplorable readiness to sacrifice the general welfare to an
arbitrary caprice, it would bo the less excusable in us to follow
their example. I do not say that this would be a perfectly
satisfactory termination of the dispute. I do not think it would
be a termination at all ; but it may well be preferable to any
immediate settlement in which both parties did not acquiesce. If
the forbearance cannot be mutual, let us be found on the side of
those who exercise, and not of those who withhold it. Only let
it be clearly understood that this is a sacrifice to peace, and not
a surrender of principle, or a pledge to bind anyone for the
future.
A much larger question than any of those I have been discuss-
ing, one involving the highest interests of the future, both in
330
BISHOr tuirlwall's
Church and State — I mean the question of elementary education
— still remains unsettled, and cannot be viewed without
Elementary '
education. painful anxiety by anyone who has the welfare either of
the Church or of the country at heart. It is the question whether
the training of the rising generation is or is not to be divorced
from religious instruction : whether those who, when they have
reached manhood, will find themselves entrusted with a large share
of political privileges, constituting their possessors a predominant
power in the State, are to grow up in the fear of God and in the
faith of Christ, or to be a law to themselves. We may lament
that such a question should ever have arisen, and as Churchmen
we might have preferred a different solution of the problem which
forced itself upon the Legislature, from that which was adopted
bv the Government. But we can neither deny the urgency of the
need which The Elementary Education Act was framed to supply,
though we may believe it to have been often grossly exaggerated ;
nor can we undertake to affirm that under the conditions of the
case, it would have been possible to provide for it by a simple
extension of the denominational system, however we may wish
that the experiment had been fairly tried. A measure which is
fiercely assailed by the most -violent partisans of opposite extremes
has a strong presumption in its favour. It may not be absolutely
perfect, but there is high probability that it comes nearer than
any other to the best that could have been devised.
Education The Act of 1870 is still on its trial. Its success in
Act of 1870. ^e carrying out 0f a compulsory system against the will
of parents who are indifferent to the advantage of an education
which they themselves never enjoyed, and who grudge the
cost because they prefer their own pleasure to their children's
welfare, still remains to be ascertained. Should it prove more
complete than either the character of our own people, or the ex-
perience of foreign countries, would lead us to expect, there would
still be room for doubt, whether the benefit of the new system
will compensate for all that it has taken away ; and we may
question the expediency and the justice of sacrificing the highest
interests of the many, who have hitherto enjoyed a fuller measure
CHARGES.
331
of religious education, to those of the few who had heen left
entirely destitute. I say this irrespectively of abuses, through
which the intention of the Legislature has been partially frus-
trated, by the erection of new schools where ample provision had
already been made for the wants of the neighbourhood. But on
the supposition of the happiest result, the value of instruction
which is confined to the simplest rudiments of secular knowledge,
may easily be overrated. I could not indeed admit that even
such instruction is not an immense gain in comparison with the
utter neglect to which so many thousands of children of the poor
have hitherto been abandoned. Churchmen, but especially clergy-
men, who deny this, and denounce secular education as
Injurious
if it was a positive evil, and ignore the moral influence If^n"".!16
of school discipline in contrast with habits of vagrancy k?nedu^-u
and lawlessness, are I believe doing more damage to the
cause of religious education than its avowed enemies. But they
would be still farther from the truth, and in greater danger of
showing themselves unfaithful toward their most sacred duty, if
they treated such instruction as sufficient, or as constituting any-
thing that deserves the name of education, and did not feel that it
only adds a new motive for the discharge of that part of their
office which relates to the feeding of Christ's lambs. And if their
opportunities are restricted by the conditions imposed by the new
law, it must be remembered, on the other hand, that those who
are brought within the reach of their ministry, come with a better
intellectual, and even moral preparation, than they might other-
wise have received.
Hitherto the working of the Act has been generally favourable
to the cause of religious education. We are not grieved
, . 0 Operation of
to hear, though it is a complaint of our adversaries rejl^*"11
against the Act, that in the six months' grace which educatl0n-
it allowed, grants were asked for 2,852 Church Schools, and that
these applications were met in the most generous and even lavish
spirit. * Nor is it painful to us to learn from the same authority
that " there are now thousands of parishes amply provided with
* General Conference of Nonconformists held in Manchester, January, 1872, p. 185.
332
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
school accommodation entirely in the hands of the Church." * We
do not consider it either as a calamity or as a reproach to the Act,
that it " has enabled the denominationalists to cover districts with
schools which will render School Boards unnecessary, except for
the exercise of the compulsory power to fill those denominational
schools." t We are glad to receive such witness to the fact that
the Church has not been insensible to the gravity of the crisis, or
unmindful of the duty which it laid upon her ; and we rejoice
that the public mind is not yet prepared to accept the secularist
Noneon- ideal. It might indeed have been expected that on the
formist siip- . . . . - . p n i
port of general question ministers 01 religion or all denomina-
secular edu-
cation, tions would have been agreed : and it is saddening to
find that so many have been induced by their hostility to the
Church to enter into an unnatural alliance with persons from
whose principles they must recoil with abhorrence, and to join
the secularist party in its endeavours to exclude all religious
teaching from schools aided by the State. I do not question their
sincerity, when they declare that " it is the intense earnestness of
their piety which makes them secularists in this matter of State
education." + But they seem to me to be playing with words
when they cast all the care of religious education on an abstrac-
tion which they call voluntary effort,% as if this phrase represented
anything which was known to exist, and not something which
has hitherto been wanting and has still to be evoked. One of
them who holds that " there can be no perfect education without
religion," and that "education properly considered must include
religious teaching," is at the same time " bold to say that the
Nonconformist Churches have not done their part sufficiently in
the past in reference to this great matter." || Happily, it would
require something more than boldness for any one to say this of
the Church of England, as compared with any other religious
body. The so-called religious difficulty, which never existed
outside the minds of persons whom it furnished with the only
* General Conference of Nonconformists held in Manchester, January, 1872,
p. 186.
t Ibid., p. 195. ; Ibid., p. 152. § Ibid., p. 256. || Ibid., p. 258.
CHARGES.
333
plausible basis for their argument, may continue to serve as a
convenient topic for platform declamation. But when we re-
member on the one hand the extreme slightness of the doctrinal
differences which separate the great mass of Nonconformists from
the Church, and on the other hand the difficulty with which the
simplest spiritual truths are instilled into the minds of children,
at the age at which they commonly leave school, the fear lest
they should be imbued with a prejudice in favour of some par-
ticular shade of theological opinion, extrinsic to that which the
Church holds in common with almost all Christian societies, can
hardly be considered as serious.
I feel that I shoiild be offering something like an indignity
to my reverend brethren, if I was to exhort them care- Proselytis-
ing Dissent-
fully to avoid even the faintest appearance of exercising fog children.
a proselytising influence on the Dissenting children who attend
their schools. I am very sure that any such exhortation would
be totally superfluous. I read with pleasure, as an illustration of
what I believe to be a notorious fact, the testimony of Mr. Pryce,
Her Majesty's Inspector of Church of England Schools for Mid
Wales, who iu his Report for 1870 observes : " I feel bound
to say that, though I have made careful inquiries, I know of no
single instance, under the present system, in my extensive dis-
trict, where the National School children are compelled to attend
church, or to learn any creed or formulary to which their parents
object, or where any undue influence is brought to bear upon the
parents or children for this purpose." Mr. Pryce proceeds to
show that the real danger lies entirely in an opposite direction :
of neglected, or imperfect, and superficial religious instruction.
It is however satisfactory to know that there are some in whom
the Christian has been too strong for the Nonconformist. Last
May several of the most eminent Nonconformist Ministers and
Laymen subscribed a Protest * against " the exclusion of the
* Published in " The Times " of May 7. It runs : "As strenuous efforts are being
made to exclude the Bible by Law from Public Elementary Schools, we the under-
signed (not connected with any established Church ) believing that such exclusion
would be a great national evil, feel it to bo our duty publicly to record our dis-
approval thereof."
BISHOP THIRL'WALI/S
Bible by Law from Public Elementary Scbools " as "a great
national evil." We sympathize with the feeling- which
Jionconfor- °
S^Sthe * Prompte(i this Declaration, and honour the courage which
th^Bibie^ ^ manifested in its opposition to a strong current of
mentary opinion among their co-religionists. But we must re-
schools. .
member that the important question is not as to the
admission or exclusion of the Bible, but as to the use which is to
be made of it. I would not deny that the simple reading of
carefully-selected passages may be very useful for the more
advanced scholars. But to employ it indiscriminately for a mere
reading exercise must in general be something much worse than
useless. There will be great danger of its being degraded in
the eyes of the child, and associated with disagreeable recollections
of a mechanical drudgery. But, on the other hand, where it is
allowed to be not only read but freely explained, it may afford a
sufficient basis for all that religious instruction which it falls
within the province of the schoolmaster to give. It must be
remembered that the Bible contains two parts of the Catechism,
the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer, on which the
chief truths of Christian Faith and practice may be easily grafted.
Distinction Let us be careful to bear in mind the important distinc-
Schooi- tion between the proper function of the Schoolmaster
master and
Clergyman. an(j the Clergyman in this respect, and to beware of
confounding them under the common description of rehgious
teaching. A well -trained schoolmaster may be fully competent
to supply all that religious instruction which stores the child's
memory with historical or even doctrinal truths. He may often
be better qualified for such teaching by his special training than
the clergyman. But the duty of bringing those truths home, not
only to the understanding, but to the heart and conscience of the
young, is one which no pastor has a right to delegate to any one
to whose office it does not properly belong. This is the proper
work of your Confirmation classes. I hardly need observe that the
present circumstances of the Church add in an incalculable degree
to the importance of those classes, and to that of the work of our
Sunday schools. But I hope that none will be induced by this
CHARGES.
335
consideration to make that work laborious and irksome, by a too
severe and prolonged strain upon tbe child's faculties and atten-
tion. Unless it be made not only easy, but interesting and
attractive, it will be likely to end in something worse than failure.
In proportion to the importance of educating the child importance
of Training
is that of training tbe master. It is no exaggeration to Colleges,
say that the whole success of the work depends upon the character
of our Training Colleges. Our own has had to contend with
great financial difficulties, through the exhaustion of the funds of
the Welsh Education Committee, from which, down to last year,
it had received a considerable part of its income. The deficiency
has been but partially supplied by an appeal to Churchmen of the
two South Wales Dioceses ; and our future is not yet so secure as
to relieve us from all anxiety on this head. But it concerns us still
more nearly to preserve the religious character of the College, and
to prevent it from lapsing into a school of mere secular instruc-
tion. On secularist principles the teacher best qualified for the
work of education in a secular school is one who, being himself
destitute of religious knowledge and belief, is unable to impart
any to his scholars.* Membership of any religious body, if not
an absolute disqualification, is at least a disadvantage, and one who
is free from all sectarian tendencies would be clearly entitled to
preference. Hence a secular system will not be complete without
the exclusion of all religious instruction from Training Colleges.
Even this might not suffice to counteract the prejudices of a
religious education in the students. The only perfectly effectual
security would be a systematic infusion of anti-religious principles.
This has not yet been proposed, and may have been seen to be a
consequence which will follow of itself when the system shall have
been fully carried out. Let it not be thought that I mean to
impute any such design to Nonconformists who are contending for
• I find myself repeating a remark which I made in my Chargo of 1848, p. 122.
" If during the whole of the time for which the school is left under the care of the
ordinary teacher, all reference to religious subjects was to be rigidly excluded, it
would become a question, wht ther a teacher who should be himself utterly destitute
of religious piinciples, and so incapable of communicating them, would not be best
fitted for the office."
336
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
secular education. I have no doubt it is one from which all would
shrink with horror. I only wish to point out that it is the
logical result of secularist principles fully developed. To avert so
frightful a national calamity as the upgrowth of such a race of
teachers, is surely an object which deserves our most earnest
efforts. But it would imply strange ignorance and inexperience to
suppose that all who enter our Training Colleges are animated by
purely disinterested motives, and would be ready to devote a
portion of their time to work which does not form a part of their
engagement, and for which they expect no remuneration. Hence
Appoint necessity °f 8upplymg the place of that inspection
Siocesfn which has been withdrawn by the Education Act, and
inspector. ^ substituting other inducements in the room of those
which have now ceased to operate. With the aid of the Society
for Promoting Christian Knowledge we have been enabled to
provide for the payment of a Diocesan Inspector for one year.
But that Society does not renew its grant; and the National
Society tas been prevented by the extraordinary pressure of other
calls on its funds from immediately taking its place. Neverthe-
less, through the liberality of our Inspector, to whom his work
has been a labour of love, and who consented to accept a salary
reduced by the amount of the Society's grant, his inspection will
be continued for another year, and, it is to be hoped, until the
National Society finds itself again in a condition to relieve us from
a part of our burden. In this Diocese I believe no other kind of
inspection will be generally and permanently efficient.
I may safely assume that there is a perfect general unanimity
among us as to the main end which we have to keep in view in
this matter. In conformity with the spirit of the Education Act,
school we w*sa as ^ar as Possible to supersede the need of
Boards. School Boards by voluntary exertion. Both Clergy and
Laity have proved the earnestness of their desire by costly sacri-
fices. We must however be prepared for a perhaps growing
frequency of cases, in which we may be unable, and can hardly
even wish, to prevent the appointment of School Boards. It
appears from Mr. Pryce's Report that in his district "the
CHAEGES.
337
managers of some Church of England voluntary schools are so
convinced of the necessity of compulsory attendance that it is
likely that a School Board will be formed in not a few parishes in
order to secure this power." We may lament the fact, but all we
can do is to make the best of it. It would be quite a mistake to
imagine that a School Board is necessarily hostile to religious
education. That must depend on the way in which it is com-
posed. And it is therefore of the utmost importance that
Churchmen, and especially the Clergy, should not be induced by
their dislike of School Boards to stand aloof from them, but
should endeavour to gain a place in them, and to avail themselves
as far as possible of their position in behalf of the interests of
religion. An opponent who expects that School Boards will soon
be spread universally over the land, believes that the majority
will chiefly consist of representatives of Church of England
principles. Let us be doing everything in our power to realize
his anticipations.*
The Returns which I have received in answer to my visitation
queries show that out of 426 parishes 54 have School
1 A Diocesan
Boards. But of these there are at present only 7 in which ^spectlng
there is a Board School. On the other hand, I find them-
that there are only 14 out of the 54 in which the Incumbent is a
member of the Board. I hope, and have no doubt, that this has
been chiefly the result of causes over which the Clergy have had
no control.
We have had reason to be thankful both for some very useful
recent legislation in Church matters, and also that we have been
spared from some of an opposite character with which we had
been threatened.
None of us I suppose would grudge a Dissenting parishioner
a place of interment in the parish churchyard, though Buriais
we do not see how it could be reasonably claimed as BlU"
a matter of right by one who had been exempt from all share in
the burden of maintaining the inclosure. Nor should we wish to
make that privilege depend on the condition that the Burial
* Manchester Conference, p. 162.
VOIj. II. z
338
BISHOP THIRL WALL'S
Service should be read over his grave, against the will of the
mourners. But the Burials Bill of last Session would have
established the right of all Nonconformists to this privilege,
without providing any sufficient safeguard against the danger
which there was cause to apprehend in many neighbourhoods,
that it might be made an occasion for the exhibition of political
or religious animosity, wantonly offensive to the feelings of
Churchmen, and tending to the desecration of the place by scenes
of tumult and disorder. We have reason therefore to rejoice
in the defeat of a measure so one-sided and unjust ; and the
more because the alleged hardship which it purported to redress
is one which would be less correctly described as either real
or sentimental, than as symbolical ; that is to say, it consisted
simply in the fact that the churchyard at present belongs to the
Established Church, and is thus an incident of an institution
which the supporters of the Burials Bill desire to abolish.
Viewed in this light, the attempt was very generally regarded by
impartial observers as at once premature and imperfect. It was
thought that if it might not have been more fitly postponed until
the accomplishment of the general object which it was intended to
forestall, it should have gone a step further, and have thrown our
churches equally open to the like promiscuous use.
inconsis- ~No doubt this inconsistency was not overlooked by
tency of its "
supporters, the promoters of the measure. They had previously
put forward a claim to " equal rights for all citizens both to the
burial-grounds and to the churches." * But it seems to have
been deemed politic to begin with one of these objects, that which
furnished the most plausible pretext, and the right to the church
will probably not be claimed until the use of the churchyard has
been won.
The mismanagement of Church property — not always arising
Ecclesias- from wilful unfaithfulness in those to whom it was
tical Dilapi-
dations Act. entrusted, of tcner perhaps due to improvidence, thought-
lessness, or the pressure of adverse circumstances, but always
giving occasion to deplorable waste, and sometimes to the inflic-
* Manchester Conference, p. 1 1 .
CHARGES.
.339
tion of grievous wrong on the families of deceased incumbents,
and on their successors — had long been seen urgently to demand a
remedy. This has at length been provided by the Ecclesiastical
Dilapidations Act of 1871. I have no doubt that when this Act
shall have come into full operation, it will be universally admitted
to have been highly beneficial to the Church. But it is not
surprising that the present burden which it unavoidably imposes
should be more sensible than the future benefit. And this may
account for the long delay which has taken place in the introduc-
tion of a measure so urgently needed. It will tend to prevent
the recurrence of abuses so gross as have heretofore been
witnessed, and it may be hoped will quicken in the Clergy the
sense of a sacred stewardship in the administration of the tempo-
ralities of the Church, which, if it had been sufficiently lively,
would have superseded the need of compulsory legislation. But
I am afraid that the object will not be fully attained without
some better provision for a periodical — say quinquennial —
renewal of inspection. Without this I do not see how there
can be any security for the main object, the keeping of ecclesi-
astical buildings in repair by means of a small occasional outlay.
And I do not think it wise to cast the responsibility of this
inspection on the Archdeacons and Rural Deans, at the imminent
risk of disturbing their friendly relations to their clerical
brethren, which it is so desirable to maintain unimpaired.
The intervention of the Patron for this purpose, which seems
also to be contemplated by the Act, will I fear only take place in
very rare and exceptional cases. But it is easier to point out a
defect than to suggest a remedy.
The Act of 1871 has been supplemented in the last Session by
one which enlarges the powers of the Governors of Queen
Queen Anne's Bounty for the benefit of mortgagors, and Bounty,
will also put an end to many irritating disputes which have arisen
on the subject of fees and charges, by the substitution of a uniform
table, to be binding (subject to amendment or alteration by the
same authority by which it is ordained) throughout the whole of
England and Wales.
z 2
340
BISHOP THIRLW ALL'S
A still greater benefit, and one of a higher order, has been con-
Act of Uni- ferred upon the Church by the Act of Uniformity Amend-
A^Iment ment Act of last Session, which has removed the restric-
tions which had been imposed upon her in the adminis-
tration of her spiritual patrimony, the Scripture and Prayer-Book.
A shortened Order for Morning or Evening Prayer may now be
used on any day except Sunday, Christmas Day, Ash "Wednesday,
Good Friday, and Ascension Day. With the approbation of the
Ordinary, there may be used a form of service drawn from
Scripture and the Prayer-Book, appropriate to special occasions,
such as a harvest gathering. On Sundays and Holydays, a form
of service varying from any prescribed by the Book of Common
Prayer, may be used at any hour, in addition to the ordinary
services. The doubts which had been felt as to the lawfulness of
using the Morning Prayer, Litany, and Communion Office, as
separate services, have been removed by an express declaration,
and the liberty of preaching a sermon preceded only by a Collect,
is no longer questionable. The benefit of these enactments will
be more generally felt in Dioceses containing a greater number of
populous parishes than in ours. But we do not the less rejoice in
the gain which they will yield to the Church.
_ „ A like remark would apply to the very useful Act of
Retirement l i J J
teted31"101* last year, enabling Clergymen, permanently incapacitated
Clergymen. ^ yjnegg> fa resign their benefices with provision of
pensions. It is to be lamented that in this Diocese, very few
clergymen are enabled by the value of their benefices to avail
themselves of this excellent Act.
Restoration This remark suggests another which concerns the con-
oftheCathe- , s ,
dial- dition of our own Diocese. I had hoped that by now I
should have been able to announce the completion of the work
which has been for so many years in progress at the Cathedral.
But it has been delayed through an unforeseen additional outlay
which was required to preserve the fidelity of the restoration. I
will not deny that I have felt some disappointment at the tardiness
of its advance ; as I had hoped that a monument of which the
Principality has so much reason to be proud, would have roused a
CHARGES.
341
larger and warmer sympathy, independently of its ecclesiastical
character and uses. But when I consider the peculiarities of its
secluded position, and the consequent wide-spread ignorance of its
very existence, and the vast number of concurrent claims of like
nature, both within and without the Diocese, I am led to think that
I have far stronger motives for thankfulness than for complaint.
It is a matter of great satisfaction to me to know that among those
who have visited the place, there is only one opinion and feeling,
of the highest admiration at the beauty of the work. During the
same period a like work has been going on throughout the parish
churches of the Diocese. I can address no bod\r of the And of
J w Parish
Clergy of any Archdeaconry, who are not able to testify churches,
this fact from their own observation. Considered with reference
to statements which are frequently heard in quarters where there
is great danger of mistaking wishes for proofs, as to the alleged
exhaustion of vital energy in the Church in Wales, it is indeed a
remarkable fact that such magnificent and costly restorations
should have been proceeding simultaneously in the four Welsh
Dioceses. Never certainly was such an allegation more flagrantly
ill-timed than at the present moment. Regard being had to the
relative tenuity of our resources, I do not hesitate to say that there
are few Dioceses with which this will not bear a not unfavourable
comparison, in respect to the exertions and sacrifices both of Clergy
and Laity for such purposes. But the same consideration has
made me loth to multiply calls for contributions toward Diocesan
objects, for the support of societies whose income must have arisen
mainly out of subscriptions of the Clergy. Though in this matter
I have not acted on my own judgment, without consulting that of
others, it is possible that some of my reverend brethren may be of
a different opinion. But they will at least I hope appreciate the
motive which determined my course.
The state of the Church in Wales has of late attracted friendly
attention outside its borders. It has been the subject of state of the
Church in
a Report and a Debate in the Lower House of Convoca- Wales,
tion, and more recently of papers and a conversation at the Congress
at Leeds. We must all feel grateful for these marks of interest in
342
BISHOP TIIIRLWALL's
its welfare, and it would be hardly courteous to pass them over
wholly unnoticed. But I do not think I should be warranted in
occupying your time with a discussion of the opinions which have
been expressed as to the causes of our weakness, or of the remedies
which have been proposed for it. The subject is very large and
complicated, and one of which it seems peculiarly difficult, even
for persons who have had some opportunities of observation, to
take a view at once comprehensive and correct. And when I
find very grave mistakes committed in matters which lie — on some
points exclusively — within my own experience, I cannot help
feeling a little distrust as to others with which I may be less
familiar, and suspecting that what for the present is most needed,
is a solid basis of well-ascertained fact.
I turn once more for a few moments to the consideration of our
general prospects.
While the constant renewal of a direct assault on the Established
Church, carried on year after year in Parliament, excited appre-
hensions which the event showed to be premature, it was thought
advisable to organize a system of defence, to be carried on by an
church Association founded for this special purpose, under the
Defence In- . .
stitution. name of the Church Defence Institution. I should be
sorry to say a word that might sound like disparagement of an
institution formed with such an object. Nor have I any doubt
that it may do good service in keeping watch over the adversary's
movements, and bringing them under timely notice, in helping to
counteract the effect of misrepresentations injurious to the cause of
the Church, and in stimulating and combining the exertions of her
friends. But I could not honestly say that I believe much will
depend upon any such movement, or that it has had any appreciable
share in bringing about that favourable change in the general
aspect of our affairs which we have recently witnessed. The
stability of the Church, so far as it rests on its connection with the
State, must mainly depend on the general sense prevailing
throughout the country, of the work it does, and the benefit it
yields. Platform addresses, and articles in periodicals circulating
almost exclusively among friends of the cause, will hardly do more
CHAKGES.
343
than confirm opinions already formed. That they should effect
any change of conviction on either side can scarcely be expected.
The question is one in which abstract reasoning, however specious,
will have little weight to counterbalance the force of usage,
association, and personal experience. Few things I believe have
contributed more to strengthen the Church than the use which has
been made of our Cathedrals since they began to gather within
their once empty spaces immense congregations, for whom the
simple Services of the Church and the power of the Word were
found to be a sufficient attraction. I am sure that the clergyman
who is labouring most diligently in his appointed sphere, is the
most efficient member of the Church of England Defence Institution,
whether his name appear in the roll of its associates or not. I am
equally sure that no one is doing the work of the Liberation Society
more effectually than one who neglects his duties, lowers his
ministerial character, and forfeits the affection and respect of his
people.
If we might assume the continuance of the ordinary course of
events, without any revolutionary interruptions, we have reason to
believe that the uprooting of the Established Church will prove a
much more difficult undertaking than has been supposed by the
more ardent spirits of the Liberation Society. But it would not
follow that it may be safely left to defy all the forces arrayed
against it by its native strength. I am however inclined to think
that some of our friends have overlooked the difference Difference
between our position, which is simply defensive, and that Churchmen
. . . and their
of our adversaries, which is wholly aggressive. The adversaries,
tactics which are suited to one of the parties so situated may not
be the best fitted for the other. I see no ground for the complaint
which has been made as to the " apathy " of Churchmen in this
matter. I believe there are few indeed who would be content to
know that the Established Church will last their time, and would
not be anxious to hand it down unimpaired to future generations.
But I sec tokens of a deepening impression in the public mind
that, if this is to be, it must be the result of some new conditions
of the Church's existence. I myself feel this necessity very strongly.
344
BISHOP THIEL WALL'S
These knockings at our gates from without and from within, this
co-operation of parties most hostile to one another for the common
end of our destruction, may not threaten us with immediate danger.
But at least they are warnings which we ought not to neglect,
that it is time to think of setting our house in order, before it is
left unto us desolate.
church Church reformers have of late become a very numerous
body, comprising perhaps very nearly all who take an
earnest and intelligent interest in the permanence and welfare
of the Church : though with a great variety of views as to
that which is practicable or desirable. I should be loth to
let this occasion — which I have so much reason to expect will
be the last of its kind — pass by without plainly and unre-
servedly, though very briefly, expressing my opinion on this
subject.
subdivision Among the points on which a very general agreement
of Dioceses. appears ^0 prevail one is that the Church stands in
urgent need of a further subdivision of Dioceses. That there are
some in which this would be highly desirable, perhaps we may
say absolutely necessary for full efficiency of administration, can
hardly be denied ; and for the extent to which it is really required
the practical difficulty might not be very great.* But there are
some who would carry the subdivision to a length at which the
difficulty would be extreme and the advantage very questionable.f
It would involve changes which experience forbids us to expect,
and would accomplish no important object which might not be
much more easily obtained in a different way which has already
been partially tried with success. The main end is of course to
multiply, not sees, but bishops ; and we have seen that this may
be effected by the appointment of suffragans, without subdivision
of the existing sees. A time perhaps will come when it will be
thought to deserve serious consideration whether episcopal powers
may not be delegated for purposes which have hitherto been
* See Visitation Charge of the Bishop of Norwich, 1872, p. 40.
t See an Essay on the Increase of the Episcopate by the present Bishop of Bath
and Wells, in " Principles at Stake."
CHARGES.
345
commonly supposed to require the presence of a Bishop, and
particularly whether Confirmation is not of that number.*
A joint Committee of the Southern Convocation on appoint-
ments to Bishoprics, appointed in 1870, recommended a Appoint-
ments to
partial repeal of the Statute of Praemunire, with a view Bishoprics,
to giving the Chapter a right in the event of their objecting to a
recommendation from the Crown, to make a representation of the
grounds of their objection. I think that a revision of the present
process of appointment would be very desirable, to remove a cause
of just offence. But my wish would be that the form of the
election should be adapted to the reality, and not the reality to
the form. The present mode of exercising the power of the
Crown, the form being amended, appears to me far preferable to
either capitular election or episcopal co-optation. The committee
conclude their Report with the expression of an earnest desire,
" that all recommendations of persons for promotion to the Epis-
copate may be made in a solemn sense of the responsibility of
such an act." In this desire all would concur. But in the very
rare cases in which appointments to the Episcopate have within
our memory been made the subject of complaint, there has been,
as far as I am aware, no reason to suppose tbat, whether judicious
or not, they were made without mature deliberation and a full
sense of responsibility, or without a clear view of the objections
which were or might be raised against them.
The benefit which may be expected to result from the revival of
Diocesan Synods, or of periodical Conferences between niooesan
Clergy and Laity, must depend in a great measure on conferences
the circumstances of each Diocese. It is possible that and Laity,
my successor will be able greatly to extend the application of the
machinery which he will find ready to his hand in our annual
meetings of Clergy and Laity. Hitherto they have been held for
* Among the offices entrusted to Presbyters in the Primitive Church, Bingham
(II., iii., § 5) enumerates "confirmation of neophytes" and "consecration of
churches." Even in Jerome's time, the power of ordination alone was reserved to
Bishops in person. The additional solemnity and impressiveness imparted to the
rite by the Chief Pastor of the Diocese is no doubt a consideration never to be
overlooked, but which need not always be allowed to outwoigh every other.
34G
BISHOP THIRLWALL'S
the transaction of business, in which all take a more or less lively
interest, and I must own that I have always been disposed to
grudge the time devoted at such meetings to the discussion of
speculative questions not involving an}7 immediately practical
issue. Perhaps I might also have shrunk from the difficulty of
organizing an assembly suited to such a purpose. But I am quite
aware that in other more favoured Dioceses the case may be
widely different. And the Diocesan Synod has the advantage of
being an instrument which the Bishop has entirely at his own
disposal, while other innovations on the existing order of things
mostly require a sanction of the Crown or the Legislature, which
cannot always be safely reckoned on. But in its bearing on the
general interests of the Church, its highest value can hardly be
anything more than that of a preparation for larger measures,
without which it may effect some local improvements, but will
not materially tend to ensure the stability of the Church. I
hardly need say that I lay no claim to any peculiar insight into
the future. I do not pretend to know better than anyone else
how long the Church, as by Law established, will continue suc-
cessfully to resist every assault that may be made on her from
without and from within, without any change in her institutions,
or any reform of the most generally acknowledged abuses which
check her progress and impair her usefulness by the mere vis
inertia or balance of parties in the State. But as far as I can
see, it does not lie in the nature of things, that her present state
should last for an indefinite period without some organic change,
and therefore I think it is the part of wisdom to keep this con-
tingency in view, however remote the need may appear. The
question which seems to me to over-ride all others, and which, as
I think, must occupy more and more of the attention of those who
Reconstmc- wish to see the Church placed on a firm basis, is the
Church re- reform, or rather the reconstruction of her representa-
presentative .
system. tive system. Since the Canon of 1603 forbade anyone,
under penalty of excommunication, to deny that " the Sacred
Synod of the Nation in the name of Christ and the King's
authority assembled, is the true Church of England by represcn-
CHARGES.
347
tation," changes have taken place which compel us to regard this
declaration as true only with respect to the time at which it was
made, or only in the sense that there is no other assembly which
has a better claim to the title. It is indeed entirely foreign to
the question which we have now before us ; for that question is
not whether the existing representation is in accordance with
either ecclesiastical or civil law, but whether it is adequate and
efficient, or, on the contrary, imperfect and incompetent for the
work it has to do.
I can speak on this subject without any prejudice against
Convocation as it is. I am not one of those who dispa- convooa-
rage either its character or its work. I believe that it tl0n'
represents a fair proportion of tne learning and ability of the
Clergy. It has shown itself well fitted for the task of collecting
materials on points requiring elaborate research, and of submit-
ting the information it received to intelligent and often instructive
discussion. I cannot agree with those who make light of these
inquiries and debates, because they have not been attended with
any immediate practical results. I do not consider it either as a
misfortune or a reproach to Convocation that, being what it is, it
should have done no more than it has. Nothing, I conceive,
could have been less desirable, or indeed a greater calamity, than
that it should bave been entrusted with any larger power of carry-
ing its views into action. For it is a partial and insufficient
representation even of the Clergy ; the Laity are not represented
in it at all ; and thus it is every way disqualified for expressing
the mind and will of the Church. If anyone thinks that a Church
— at least that the Church of England — has no need of such an
organ, he must consider the revival of Convocation as a mistake,
and all attempts at reforming and remodelling it as a waste of
labour. I cannot believe that many earnest minds will be found to
take this view of the object, though, in presence of the difficulties
which beset its attainment, some may too hastily resign them-
selves to the conviction of its hopelessness. The experience of the
interval which has elapsed since the revival of Convocation seems
to me sufficient to show that no higher benefit than it has hitherto
348
BISHOP THIRLWALI/S
yielded is to be expected from it under its present conditions ; but
not at all adverse to tbe hope that a change may yet be brought
about in its constitution, which will open a new and brighter era
in its history.
Union be- The great advantage which may be reasonably looked
tween Clergy . . , .
and Laity, for from the restoration of the Laity to their rightful
and between
the Episco position* m which they would have a direct voice iu the
pate- government of their Church, would be a strengthening
of the bond of union, now in general so slightly felt, so lightly
broken, between the Clergy and the Laity, and between both and
the Episcopate. Let me say a word to explain my meaning on
this last point. I cannot help observing that there probably
never was a time when the Bishops were more frequently the
subjects of harsh judgments and bitter invectives. It may be
thought that if I lament this fact, it is from a personal feeling,
because it touches the honour of the order to which I belong.
But on the contrary, so far as that is concerned, I have reason to
be perfectly content. "When I see that the gravest imputation
with which Bishops, as a body, are now assailed, is not any
breach or neglect of the ordinary duties of their office, but the
attitude they take up in the controversies of the day, and when I
observe that, as a body, they are censured with equal severity by
the extreme partisans on each side, I think I have a right to con-
clude that the blame they incur is indeed the highest praise they
could receive, and that their conduct as a body, and on the whole,
has in this respect been just what it ought to have been. But
with a view to the general interests of the Church, the existence
of such a feeling is much to be deplored. I think the Bishops
ought to be relieved from the undivided responsibility which
subjects them to so much unjust obloquy while it so greatly
lessens the moral weight of their decisions. This, I believe,
would be one of the many good fruits which might be expected
from such a reform. Without it, I do not think it possible for
the Church ever to put forth her full strength, either for the
purpose of self-defence or for the carrying on of her work.
No thoughtful observer can doubt that the time which lies before
CHARGES.
349
us will be one of extraordinary trial to the Church, and espe-
cially to her ministers. It is not given to any of us to Prospects 0f
foresee the issue. Nor is it desirable that we should e mc '
attempt to anticipate it either by anxious or hopeful forebodings,
which must depend more on each man's individual temperament
than on any substantial ground. I am not now speaking of a
trial in the sense of suffering ; but it is certain that the coming
days will test the sincerity and earnestness of everyone's attach-
ment to his Church, if not to the eyes of men, yet in the sight of
God. He will have more power over it, both for good and evil,
than in ordinary times, though it is painful to reflect that the
power of evil may be exercised by simple indolence and negligence,
while the good can only be accomplished by some amount of
exertion and sacrifice. This however is a thought which will
rather animate than deter all loyal and generous spirits, who
would not wish, if they could, to offer unto God of that which
costs them nothing. There is a call for a more than ordinary
degree of devotedness. Everyone has something to Necessity of
offer, and the question will not be whether it is much eT0 e esa'
or little, but whether it is his best, and offered with a willing
mind. There are among us diversities of gifts and of administra-
tions, but all subservient to the same Lord, all capable of being
sanctified by the same spirit. One occupies a position of authority,
from which his influence commands a wide range. Another is
gifted with the power of enriching the Church with the fruit of
his studies and meditations ; of pleading her cause against her
adversaries ; and of winning wanderers into her fold. The higher
station and the rarer gifts may involve a more perilous responsi-
bility ; but none who have received this ministry have been left
destitute of ample means and opportunities for making full proof
of it in the service of God through the Church. However
narrow and obscure may be the sphere of their labour, it is the
same work in which they have to take part, the same faithfulness
which is to be shown in that which is least as in much, Beneficial
# m influence of
the same blessing which all are invited to share. In the unity of aim.
sense of this unity of aim and effort, which is independent of all
350
BISHOP THIRLWALL's CHARGES.
fluctuations of human affairs, each will find comfort and strength,
stedfastness and peace. While his zeal is quickened in the care
of that which is specially committed to his stewardship, his
sympathy will be drawn out to all that affects the welfare of the
Church at large. He will he living not in and to himself, a life
which is not merely his own, hut is the life of the Church in
Christ, or Christ's life in the Church which is His body. "We
shall then indeed all the more lament the controversies which
disturb the peace, and waste the strength of the Church. But we
may find consolation as well as warning in the fact that our con-
dition in this respect is not worse than the strife and divisions
which prevailed in a primitive Church immediately subject to
Apostolical guidance. We may even view it with thankfulness,
as a sign of a love of truth, which, if often passionate and one-
sided, is always infinitely preferable to the quiet of apathy and
indifference, and to the hollow uniformity imposed by a pretended
infallible authority. But we shall not the less be striving to walk
by the Apostolical rule, which, if fully observed, would be a
remedy for all our evils, and a safeguard against all our dangers.
" Following after the things which make for peace, and things
wherewith one may edify another." * " Doing nothing through
strife or vain-glory ; but in lowliness of mind, esteeming each
better than ourselves." " Looking not every man on his own
things, but every man also on the things of others." In one
word, " having this mind in us which was also in Christ
Jesus." t
* Rom. xiv. 19.
t Phil. ii. 3, 4, 5.
APPENDIX.
Note A.
Athanasius o;i the Unscriptural Phraseology of the Nicene Creed.
In reply to the objection : e8ei Trepi toO Kvpiov koi S^T^pos r\pZw
'Irjarov Xpiarou e< twv ypacfawv to. Trepi avTov yeypa/xp,eVa Aeye(T0ai p.r;
dypdcpov; eTreicdyecr^ai At'^eis, he says : val eSei (pairjv av kcu eywye,
aKpifiearepa yap Zk twv ypacfiwv /xdXXov r) e£ irepwv io~TL Ta. tt}s aXrjOeias
yvo>pto-fjLaTa, dAA' rj KaKorjdeia koI fiera. Travovpyias TraAip,/3oAos dcre/3eia
twv Trepi Eu(re'/3iov rjvayKdae tous e'TTicrKOTrovs Aeu/corepov eK0ea6ai to. Ttjv
daefieiav airwv avarpen-oira pryp-ara. "(Syn. Nicama; contra Haor. Arian.
Decreta i., p. 282.)
Note B.
Athanasius on the Sufficiency of the Nicene Creed.
rj^iuxrdv rives o>s eVSeuis i)^ov<rq^ ttJs Kali NiKaias avvoSov, ypdij/ai Trepi
TricrTew?, Kai eVe^e/py/craV ye TrpoTreTcos' ry Se dyia (rwoSos »/ eV %ap8iKrj
crvvaxOelcra ryyaj/aKTTycre Kai wpiae, /xvSev cri Trepi TriVreaJS ypd<f>ea6at, aAA'
apKuaOai Trj ev Ni/cata Trap' auroO iraTepwv (I. Trapa Tail/ iraTepwv) bp.oXoy-q-
Qetcrr) irloret, Sid to p/^Sev auTTy AeiVeiv, dAAa TrXr'/prj eixre/Jeias eirai, Kai on
p:?) Sei eKTideaOai Sevrepav many, iVa p.rf ry tc NiKa/a ypacpelva Jjs dre'Arys
oJua vo/ua-Orj, Kai Trpoc^aais Sofijj tois edeXovo-i TroAAd/cis ypd<f>eii> Kai bpl^eiv
■n-epi nio-Tews. (Epistola ad Antiochenses i., p. 576.)
It appears to me that this passage, where the meaning of Sevrepa Triors
admits of no doubt, ought to govern the interpretation of the ambiguous
expression trepa ttiotis in the decree of the Council of Ephesus, which
is explained by Mr. MacColl (p. 10) and others, to mean " another /V«7A,"
that is, doctrine repugnant to that of the Nicene Creed. That prohibition
sounds superfluous. But the Fathers at Ephesus had as good right, and
as much reason, to forbid that which the Fathers at Sardica had declared
ought not to be done, as those of Sardica to express such a judgment ;
352
APPENDIX.
in which Athanasius fully concurred. The fact seems to me clearly to
disprove Mr. MacColl's arbitrary assertion, that the Fathers of Ephesus
and Chalcedon " had as little authority as inclination to forbid the impo-
sition of a new Creed if circumstances required it." If that had been
true with regard to them, it must have been equally true with regard to
those of Sardica, in whose case it is palpably false.
Note C.
Bishop Jeremy Taylor and Mr. MacColl.
As I am not acquainted with Mr. MacColl's previous writings, I do
not know how far he may have earned a right to look down with con-
tempt on the intellectual side of Jeremy Taylor's character, and to restrict
his merits to " charm of diction, affluence of imagination, and devotional
fervour." Perhaps I may provoke an expression of still loftier disdain,
if I refer to a widely different judgment of Bishop Reginald Heber (whom
Mr. MacColl would probably let down as an amiable enthusiast), who,
speaking of the Liberty of Prophesying (" Life of Jeremy Taylor," p.
ccx.), observes, " On a work so rich in intellect, so renowned for charity,
which contending sects have rivalled each other in approving, and which
was the first, perhaps, since the earliest days of Christianity, to teach
those among whom differences were inevitable, the art of differing harm-
lessly, it would be almost impertinent to enlarge in commendation."
But it suited Mr. MacColl's purpose to decry the intellectual powers of
a writer, whose views differed in many points from his own ; and perhaps
he could hardly help feeling some degree of antipathy toward one who
was distinguished by strong sense, earnest love of truth, charity, and
freedom from prejudice, quite as much as by the qualities conceded to
him by Mr. MacColl.
Mr. MacColl could not resist the temptation of citing a passage from
a work erroneously attributed to Jeremy Taylor by Mr. Lecky (see a
letter of Archdeacon Churton in the " Guardian " of July 24), though,
but for the purpose of damaging Jeremy Taylor's reputation, the quota-
tion, even if it had not been a forgery, would have been utterly irrele-
vant : since if Taylor's fancy had been impressed with such a picture of
the future state, it must have strengthened his repugnance to the damna-
tory clauses, which, so far from being, as Mr. MacColl represents,
" milder," involved these dreadful consequences as the penalty of error.
This however is a matter in which Mr. MacColl has a right to his own
opinion or taste, and with which I have nothing to do. But in the
charges which he has brought against Jeremy Taylor's theology, I am
so implicated as to be constrained to take this occasion of noticing them.
APPENDIX.
353
I am not indeed directly concerned in the first charge, which in sub-
stance involves an accusation of gross ignorance and offensive levity.
But I cannot pass it over in silence, lest I should appear tacitly to admit
its justice. Mr. MacColl (p. 32) describes Jeremy Taylor as " a writer
who could characterize the Arian controversy contemptuously as a dis-
pute about a vowel, and who held himself at liberty to accept or reject
the Nicene Creed," and as " saying that it makes no difference whether
we consider the Son as 6/xoovo-ios or 6/xoiouo-tos with the Father " (which
indeed would be quite true as to the grammatical, though not as to the
conventional value of the terms). But though, when he inserted the
damaging forgery from Mr. Lecky's work, he gave the volume and page
in which it was to be found, he has given no reference, nor any kind of
clue to the passage on which he grounds this charge of bad taste and
unsound theology. He seems to have thought that his readers were
likely to be more familiar with the writings of Jeremy Taylor than with
Mr. Lecky's. No doubt he also presumed that all would give himself
credit for a correct report of Taylor's statements, though he does not
pretend to cite a single word. I am sorry that I have not been able to
discover the passage. I am thus placed in a difficult and disagreeable
position. Mr. MacColl does not scruple to tax Jeremy Taylor, who is
unable to defend himself, with being " as a controversialist not always
very scrupulous." But I might be thought uncourteous, if I was to say
that this is exactly the impression which his own work has made upon
myself, and that candour is among the last qualities for which I can give
him credit. It appears to me not inconceivable, that he may have
trusted too much to his memory, or have misunderstood the drift of
Jeremy Taylor's argument. This is a point on which I must suspend my
judgment until I see Jeremy Taylor's own words.
I have however a like complaint to make on my own behalf, which
heightens my distrust of Mr. MacColl's accuracy. Mr. MacColl fancied
that he had convicted me of something which he calls Pyrrhonism : and
ho takes occasion to remark (p. 18), " I cannot help expressing my regret
that the Bishop of St. David's should have been a party to the hounding
of Dr. Newman out of the Church of England a quarter of a century
ago." I do not know that I was ever much more astonished than by this
remark. Mr. MacColl gives no reference to any publication of mine to
which ho alludes : and I know of two only in which I could have done
what he imputes to me. They are the Charges I delivered at my first
and my second Visitation. The second of these was delivered in the
autumn of the same year, 1845, in which Mr. Newman went over to
Rome. This therefore could have no share in urging his departure ; and
the only allusion to him contained in it is in a note, speaking of him in
terms of the highest respect. There remains then the Primary Charge
of 1842. Few no doubt recollect anything of its contents. But every -
VOL. II. A A
354
AFFENDIX.
one who does, or has the means of referring to it, is aware not only that
there is notbing in it to warrant Mr. MacColl's observation, but that its
whole tendency is as directly as possible the reverse of that which he
attributes to me ; and I think I have a right to call upon him to substan-
tiate his accusation, under a penalty to which no man of honour can be
indifferent.
But when he represents Jeremy Taylor as one " who held himself at
liberty to accept or reject the Nicene Creed," and " claimed the right of
sitting in judgment on the Nicene Council," and thus " repudiated the
authority of the Church from which he received his commission," I am
obliged to say that Mr. MacColl has entirely missed the point of the
question, and has misstated Jeremy Taylor's position. It is not true
that Jeremy Taylor held himself at liberty to accept or reject the Nicene
Creed. As far as we can judge from his words, he appears to have
believed it quite as firmly as Mr. MacColl himself. It is not true that
Jeremy Taylor " claimed the right of sitting in judgment on the Nicene
Council." The point on which he exercised his judgment, and on which
the same right is claimed by the Bishop who " backed him up," is of a
totally different nature, and seems to have been entirely misunderstood
by Mr. MacColl. From his remarks on this subject, and from other
passages in his work, I should gather that like many clever persons, he
is subject to fits of absence, in which he is apt to forget to what Church
he belongs. The Nicene Fathers were responsible for the profession of
faith which they promulged : and this Jeremy Taylor heartily accepts.
But for the Convocation of the Council, which is the thing that he held
to be questionable in point of discretion, they were in no way responsible.
The responsibility of that measure rested entirely with Constantine and
his ecclesiastical Privy Councillor, Hosius of Cordova. Constantine, in
his simplicity, believed the dispute which had arisen at Alexandria to be
no more than a trifling squabble about words, wbich might be soon com-
posed by a friendly conference. His ignorance was certainly excusable,
since Hosius did not undeceive him. But it was morally impossible for
the Bishops to disobey his summons, and equally so, when they had met,
to refuse to declare what they held to be sound doctrine. That which
Jeremy Taylor considered as open to doubt, was the wisdom of the whole
proceeding, which is a concern of Constantine and Hosius.
It is true, Jeremy Taylor also thought that it would have been better
to have kept the very words of Scripture, and not to have introduced
such a term as o/aoovo-los. In so thinking he shared an opinion held by
many at the time of the Council, and, as I have shown, by Athanasius
himself, who defended it only as a necessary evil. Until it is proved
that every word of the Nicene Creed was dictated by Divine inspiration,
everyone now must be at liberty to share that opinion, which does not in
the least affect the truth of any article of the Creed. When Mr. MacColl
APPENDIX.
355
(p. 34) pronounces it " subversive of the dogmatic position of the Church
of England," he certainly earns the distinction of having carried intole-
rance to its utmost possible length, and on his own private authority-
introduced a new limitation in her terms of communion, which no lover
of truth could accept.
Mr. MacColl has had the kindness to instruct me with regard to the
conditions required for the validity of a General Council. But his
remarks are almost as irrelevant to Jeremy Taylor's position and to mine,
as the bulk of his work is to the question of the Athanasian Creed. Nor
do they appear to me of any great value in themselves, but rather likely
to mislead his readers. It is true, as he says, that a Council may fully
satisfy every other condition of a General Council, and yet not be entitled
to that designation, unless it be received by the Church at large. The
Council of Nicasa is acknowledged by the Church of England as having
been stamped with the seal of that reception. But that is not the ground
on which she requires her ministers to accept the Nicene Creed. The
sole ground is that stated in the eighth Article. It is because it may be
proved by most certain warrant of Holy Scripture, and, as is clear from
the two preceding Articles, for no other reason. (See Donaldson,
' Christian Orthodoxy,' p. 419.) It is indeed most happy for us that she
has laid this sure foundation, and has not left the faith of her children to
depend upon the fact of reception, which it is impossible for anyone to
ascertain. The theory is that the decrees of a Council claiming OZcume-
nicity are examined by particular assemblies convened for that purpose
in all other parts of the Christian world, and if universally adopted,
become henceforth part of the faith of the Church. This sounds quite
satisfactory as long as no question is asked as to the meaning of the term
reception, or as to the conditions of a valid reception. It may be that
something short of express assent might be held sufficient. But at least
it cannot be a submission extorted by fear. It must be assumed that the
Synods or Churches, by which the decrees are ratified, were at liberty to
accept or reject. But how precarious, to say the least, is this assumption
with regard to the Byzantine Councils ! At Nicasa, Arius, and the
Bishops Secundus and Theonas, who with him refused to subscribe the
Creed, were immediately punished with banishment, before any inquiry
had been made to ascertain whether the Council really represented the
mind of the Church, and was justly entitled to the name of (Ecumenical.
Bishops, who had the fate of Nestorius before their eyes, and were
informed by the Imperial Magistrates that they must either accept the
decrees of the Council of Ephesus, or avow themselves Nestorians, were
hardly in a position to exercise an impartial judgment. The prospect of
ending their days in an Egyptian mine, like the Bishop Alexander of
Hierapolis, could be regarded by few with perfect indifference. The
reception of the formulary decreed by the Council of Chalcedon, under
356
APPENDIX.
the pressure of the Imperial Commissioners, appears to have been simply
tacit acquiescence, enforced on all : on ecclesiastics under penalty of
degradation. The object of the Imperial policy for centuries was to stifle
controversy by a compulsory uniformity. And it is evident that it never
occurred to Constantine to imagine that the decrees of Nicaea needed
confirmation. 'O rots Tpiaxocriois ypeaev c7r<.<XKo7rois ov&ev Hcttlv erepov t) tov
®eov yvoj/x^, was his language in his letter to the Church of Alexandria.
(Socrat. 1, c. ix.) And as little did the Emperor Marcian intend that
any of his subjects should have a voice on the formulary of Chalcedon.
The theory of this period appears to have been, that for the decrees of a
Council duly constituted, when confirmed by the Emperor, silence on the
part of the Church was a sufficient reception.
The minority at the Vatican Council justly complained of the want of
freedom which vitiated all its proceedings. But what was the moral
influence of the Pope, however grossly abused, compared to the power of
the Byzantine despots ? Besting as we do on Scriptural authority for
all the Articles of our belief, we can contentedly resign ourselves to this
uncertainty as to the fact of reception, which might otherwise be perplex-
ing. It is enough for us to know that the majority in the Council came
to a right decision, and therefore that, whether it was freely received or
not, we are safe in adopting it.
Mr. MacColl belongs to that class of persons whom prudence would
dissuade from living in glass houses. He begins his Letter to Mr. Glad-
stone with the remark : " The real points at issue in the controversy on
the Athanasian Creed have been so overlaid with irrelevant matter that
it is not easy for the public at large to understand the exact position of
the question." He is apparently unconscious that his own book furnishes
the most signal example of the fact hitherto witnessed, having all the
look of being largely made up of extracts from a commonplace book,
which, as he might well think them too good to be lost, he has taken
this occasion to publish.
He charges Jeremy Taylor with a breach of allegiance to the Church,
" from which he received his commission," but leaves it doubtful to what
Church he himself belongs. In the course of his rambles he lights upon
the doctrine of the Fall, and elucidates it by the observation (p. 130) :
" It is the teaching of the Church that, in addition to that aggregate of
natural endowments which we possess in common with him (Adam), and
which constitute the integrity of human nature, our First Parents pos-
sessed a gift of Supernatural Grace, sufficiently powerful to sway the
will in the right direction, but not strong enough to interfere with its
essential freedom." I do not dispute Mr. MacColl's right to adopt this
scholastic figment, of which Bishop Heber (" Life of Jeremy Taylor,"
p. cexxvi.) observes, that " it can hardly stand the test of Scripture." But
to whatever Church it may belong, it is no doctrine of the Church of
APPENDIX.
357
England, but, as far as appears, only of the Church — whatever that may
be— of Mr. MaeColl.
He reproves Jeremy Taylor for " flippancy," on account of his express-
ing the opinion we have been considering on the proceedings of the
Council of Nicaea. But he does not scruple himself to make merry with
some of the most solemn passages in the Prayer-Book. He has intro-
duced a discussion on "imperfect views of the Incarnation," and observes
(p. 153) that according to the view which he condemns, "in the Holy
Communion no positive gift is supposed to be imparted. The Sacrament
is only a symbolical picture of the death of Christ, well calculated to
bring that event vividly before us, and to stir up grateful emotions in our
hearts in consequence. But the God-Man is absent — far away beyond
Sirius and the Milky Way — and we are to ascend where He is in imagina-
tion and feeling. And this is what is called the ' spiritual presence ' of
Christ in the Holy Communion, or rather in the heart of the worthy com-
municant."
I say nothing of Mr. MacColl's perversions of the doctrine which he
assails, and which I have no doubt he is sincerely unable to understand,
nor of the incapacity which he betrays to conceive spiritual distance or
nearness, or any that is not measured by miles or inches. But a clergy-
man of the Church of England might have been expected to show a little
more reverence for the language of the Collect for Ascension Day, in
which the Church prays for that very " ascent in heart and mind "
which he represents as an idle dream, and for the Sursum corda of
the Communion Office, which comes equally within the scope of his
ridicule.
I do not think that Mr. MaeColl has succeeded in demolishing Jeremy
Taylor, or that he will escape the Nemesis which awaits those who
wantonly assail tbe illustrious dead. But I have no doubt that his argu-
ments will satisfy all who were previously of his opinion, and especially
where he winders farthest from his subject.
INDEX.
A.
Act of Submission, i. 214; obscurity of,
215; character of, ib. ; principle of, 216.
Age, spirit of the, i. 50.
Anglo-Saxon Church, i. 203, &c.
Apostolical succession, different views of,
i. 38; relation to the doctrine of the
Sacraments, ib. ; opinion of Dr. Arnold,
of Rugby, 39 ; doubtful use of, in con-
troversy, 40.
Aquinas, doctrine of transubstantiation, i.
241, 249, 250.
Archdeacons, visitations of, i. 147.
Arnold, Dr., of Rugby, quoted, i. 39, 49.
Article, the Eleventh, i. 32 ; the Twenty-
second, 44.
Articles, the Thirty-nine, a standard of
orthodoxy, i. 240 ; their literal and
grammatical sense, i. 42 ; framed to
admit different views, 43 ; Dr. New-
man's application of the principle, ib. ;
their relation to the Prayer Book, i.
113.
Athanasius, on the Nicene Creed, ii. 351.
Athanasian Creed, the, i. 394, 395 ; ii. 317 ;
the practical question, ii. 318; the Church
has power to regulate the use of it, 319;
history of, 320 ; characteristics of the,
325 ; damnatory clauses of the, dif-
ferently explained, 322, 323 ; said to
be misunderstood, 327 ; explanations of
them not generally accepted, ib. ; com-
promise suggested, 328 ; only affect the
laity, ib. ; mode of conducting the con-
troversy deprecated, 329.
B.
Babbage, Prof., on Miracles, ii. 88.
Baptism, sacrament of, i. 114, &c. ; bene-
fit conveyed by, 115 ; tendency of oppo-
site views concerning, 116 ; teaching of
St. Augustine, and of the Church of
Rome, 158.
Baptism, infant, i. 155, &c. ; the case of
baptised infants dying in infancy, 158 ;
remission of original sin in, 168 ; pre-
venient grace, i. 156, 157.
Baptism, Calvin's doctrine of, i. 157 ; sin-
gularity of Mr. Gorham's tenet respect-
ing, 158; objection to the doctrine of
baptismal grace, 159 ; conditional or
unconditional efficacy of, i. 160 ; bearing
of the view taken of it upon the work of
Christian education, ib. ; Hammond's
view of, 161, 166, 169; doctrine of the
Church catechism, 162 ; statements of
Bishop Blomfield and Bishop Bethell,
ib.; notion of a covenant essential to,
maintained by Hooker and Hammond,
166 ; Bishop Wilson and Thorndike,
167.
Bellarmine, Be Eurharistia, i. 250.
Bellarmine, doctrine of transubstantiation,
ii. 285, 286.
Bennett case, the, ii. 312; charitable
interpretations of the Court, 314.
Berengarius, i. 331, 341.
Bevan Charity, the, i. 313.
Bible, relation of religion to the, ii. 79 ;
history of the, 82 ; what is essential in,
83.
Bilingual difficulty, the, in "Wales, i. 8.
Birmingham, King Edward's School at, i.
304.
Bishops, being Privy Councillors, should
be members of the Court of Appeal, i.
172; but should not be the only judges
of doctrine, 173.
Bishops, conduct of, with regard to Ritual-
ism, ii. 148, 149 ; at the time of the
Restoration, 151.
Bishops, address of, to tho clergy of both
provinces, ii. 147.
Bishoprics, appointments to, ii. 345.
Bowstead. Mr., his Report on the Schools
in the Principality, i. 366, &c.
Bull. Bishop, his doctrine of justification,
i. 33.
Burials Bill, the, ii. 337 ; inconsistency of
its supporters, 338.
Burial office, memorial on the, i. 391 ;
conscientious difficulties of the clergv,
393.
Butler's, Rev. W. Archer, Letters on
Development, i. 186.
INDEX.
359
c.
Canon, the twenty-ninth, i. 399.
Casaubon, his rebuke of Cardinal Baronius,
ii. 150.
Catechism, the, i. 112.
Catechism, Church, how regarded by Dis-
senters, i. 373 ; proper use of, 374.
Cathedral of St. David's, restoration of
the, ii. 93, 94 ; 258, 259 ; 340.
Catholic Church, appeal to the, irrelevant
to a question of Anglican orthodoxy, ii.
72.
Catholic teaching, that which is so called
is at variance with the mind of the
Church of England, i. 266.
Choral associations, formation of, ii. 156.
Christ, character of, ii. 25 ; divinity of,
28 ; human and divine knowledge of,
76 ; difficulty of the question, 77 ;
attempt of Lower House of Convocation
to settle it, ib.
Church, a free, ii. 142.
Church and State, relations between, ii.
206 ; union of, ii. 141.
Church, aspect of, externally, ii. 2 ; inter-
nally, 3 ; evils in the, i. 4 ; hopes of im-
provement, i. 6 ; evils not inherent in her
system, i. 7 ; distinction between, and a
school of philosophy, ii. 52 ; ideal of a
national, 54 ; divisions in the, i. 87 ,
influence of the, ii. 153 ; services of the,
not sufficiently attractive, 154 ; reme-
dies suggested, ib. ; importance of a
study of the Primitive, ii. 185 ; Church
of the Catacombs and the Church of the
Vatican, 187 ; of England and of Rome,
188 ; work of the, i. 190 ; spirit in
which it should be done, 192 ; power of
the State to sever its connection with
the, ii. 218; prospects of the, i. 229,
247.
Church Defence Institution, ii. 342.
Church doctrine, popular expositions of, i.
13.
Churches built and restored, i. 143 ; im-
proved architecture of, 144 ; condition
of, in the diocese, i. 195, 196 ; restoration
of, ii. 341 ; repair of, i. 9, ii. 258.
Churches and chapels, alienation of the
masses from, ii. 43 ; prospect of winning
the irreligious class, 45.
Churches and schools, building of, in the
diocese, i. 309.
Church establishments, no express guid-
ance in Scripture on, ii. 214 ; complica-
tion of the question, 215; movements
affecting, 216 ; State countenance of, ib. ;
neither absolutely good nor bad, 217.
Church Institution, the, ii. 129.
Church in Wales, the, ii. 34.
Church of England, aspect of, i. 349 ;
contentions in the, i. 262 ; present con-
dition of the, i. 151, 152 ; prospects of,
ii. 304 ; fear of disorganization in, 305 ;
Eomanizing tendencies in, i. 183 ; com-
pared with Church of Rome, i. 106 ; the
true life of, 108.
Church of Rome, secessions to, i. 184 ;
groundless nature of them, ib. ; her
special advantages, i. 106, 107 ; has
forbidden or discouraged the reading of
Scripture, ii. 5 ; language used in the
Oxford Tracts respecting, i. 46 ; change
of feeling towards, 47 ; charged with
idolatry, i. 77, 78 ; controversy with,
reduced to a single point, 104 ; vitality
of the, ii. 264; character of, 265, 266;
improvement in, since the Council of
Trent, 269 ; her policy changed since
the Council of Trent, ii. 273 ; spirit in
which she should be regarded, 274.
Church order, value of, i. 18, 19.
Church principles, danger of neglecting, i.
16.
Church property, alienation of, ii. 219.
Church rates, i. 349 ; Report of Committee
of the House of Lords on, 350 ; Aboli-
tion Bill passed in the Commons, 351 ;
defeated in the Lords, 352 ; fallacy of
conscientious objection to, 353 ; abolition
of, ii. 97 ; state of the question, ii. 96 ;
Braintree case, i. 231; motives for
resisting, 233 ; objection to compulsion,
234 ; mode of levying, ib. ; argument
drawn from contests about, i. 355 ;
concessions on this head will not satisfy
Nonconformists, 356 ; amount levied by,
ib. ; effects of the cessation of, ib. ;
Report of the Select Committee on, 358;
a commutation recommended, ib. ; pro-
posal for exemption, ib. ; its probable
effects, 359 ; agitation on the subject
due to the Liberation Society, 360 ;
ulterior ends in view, 361.
Church reform, ii. 344, &c. ; an organic
change probable, 346 ; reconstruction of
the representative system most impor-
taut, ib.
Church societies, support of, i. 315 ; with-
drawal of Queen's Letters, i. 316 ; origin
of it, ib., false pretences of the Declara-
tion by which it was obained, 317-319.
Clergy, conduct of the, i. ] 09 ; deficient
supply of, i. 146 ; deficiency of, i. 7 ;
importance of frequent intercourse and
concert, i. 11 ; relation of, to the Crown,
i. 211 ; report on discipline of the, 221 ;
supply of, i. 225 ; the parochial, ought to
be adequately provided for, i. 84.
Clergy Discipline Bill, i. 109, &c.
Clergymen, liberty of, in matters of
opinion, ii. 36 ; resignation of, ii. 340.
Clerical court, impracticability of, ii.
310.
Clerical meetings, i. 13, i. 230 ; peculiarity
360
INDEX.
of, in Wales, i. 14 ; borrowed from Dis-
sent, 15.
Cobb, Mr., on Reunion, &c, ii. 261 j Romish
doctrine, 275 ; the Jesuits, 277 ; tran-
substantiation, 281, &c.
Colenso, Bishop, publications of, ii. 59 ;
committee of Lower House of Convoca-
tion, 61 ; his official position gave cur-
rency to his work, 62 ; effects ot his mode
of publication, 63 ; tone of his language,
ib. ; its assumption, 64 ; relation of his
book to the doctrines of the Church of
England, 65 ; action of Convocation, 66 ;
mode of dealing with propositions ex-
tracted from the book, 70-80 ; remarks
on the studj- of the work, 80-81 ; trial of,
a mockery, ii. 143.
Collections, weekly, i. 320.
Communion office, the English, and the
Romish mass, ii. 233 ; compared, 244 ;
English and Scotch compared, i. 278 ;
principal difference between, 279 ; Bi-
shop Horsley's opinion, 280; omission of
prayer of invocation in the English
office, 281 ; language of the Scotch
office not free from ambiguity, 282 ;
Romish and English contrasted, ii. 161.
Communion Service, in second book of
Edward VI., i. 243 ; ante-communion
office, 244.
Confirmation, age at which the rite should
be administered, ii. 127 ; instruction
with a view to, i. 23 ; opposition to, i.
236 ; connection of the Catechism and, ib. ;
title of the office of, in Edward VI.'s
Prayer Book, ib. ; the office may be
revised with advantage, 237 ; early pre-
paration for, 238.
Conscience Clause, the, ii. 104 ; vehement
denunciation of, 105 ; nature of discus-
sions on, 106 ; Prof. Plumptre on, ib. ;
ground of opposition to, 107 ; view taken
of it by the committee of the National
Society, 108 ; weakness of their argu-
ment, 109 ; principles at stake in the
dispute, 110 ; alleged violation of com-
pact, 111, and interference with religious
instruction in Church schools, 113;
charged with insinuating principles of
secular education into denominational
schools, 115; is a necessary safeguard,
121 ; perpetuation of, 121.
Convocation, revival of, i. 174, 198; has
not been either national or representa-
tive, 175; dangers besetting the revival,
ib. ; objects contemplated by it secured
already, 177 ; further powers aimed at,
179; not properly representative, 199;
the work of, 202 ; history of, i. 203, &c. ;
first session of, 2u9 ; twofold aspect of,
ib. ; original character of, 212 ; exten-
sion of, the term, 213; parliamentary,
ib. ; Act of Submission, 214 ; facilities
afforded to, 216 ; right of clergy to re-
turn members to, 217; rights of the
Lower House of, ib. ; why it meets si-
multaneously with parliament, 218 ;
suspension of its deliberations, ib. ; in
action of, 219 ; duties of a revived, 220 ;
advantages to be derived from, ib.;
character of proceedings, 221 ; com-
mittee on the constitution of, 222 ; joint
deliberation of the two provinces, 223 ;
representation of the laity, ib. ; limits
within which its functions can be exer-
cised, 224 ; jealousy of, on the part of
the State, 226 ; present state and pros-
pects of, ib. ; capacities of, for good,
228 ; change of opinion respecting, 286 ;
unable to effect needful changes, 288 ;
expression of opinion on books, ii. 66 ;
first judgment of, since its revival, 67 ;
its effects, 68 ; its judgment on theolo-
gical works should be dogmatical, 69 ;
dealing of the committee with the first
proposition in Bishop Colenso's work,
70 ; with the second, 72 ; report of
Lower House on the work not sanctioned
by the Upper House, 74 ; its dealing
with the third proposition of the Bi-
shop's book, 75 ; fails to touch the real
point at issue, ib. ; dealing with the
fourth proposition concerning our Lord's
divine knowledge, 76, 77 ; serious omis-
sions in the report, 78 ; reform of, 139 ;
vindication of, 140 ; does not adequately
express the mind of the Church, 347.
Cosin, Bishop, "History of Transubstantia-
tion," i. 332.
Council of Trent, i. 44, 45 ; the history of
the, ii. 265.
Councils, general, ii. 141.
Court of Appeal, constitution of, i. 172, 173 ;
ii. 132; substitution of a purely ecclesias-
tical tribunal for, 135 ; excellence of the
present, 138 ; proposed to refer doctrinal
questions to an ecclesiastical council,
137 ; effects of the judgments, ii. 309 ;
judgment of, on the Eucharist, 312 ;
judgment of the, upon Ritual, ii. 237,
&c. ; distasteful to the Ritualists, 239 ;
i. 246, 247.
D.
Davies, Rev. Llewelyn, on Miracles, ii. 88.
Declaration of the clergy on the judgment
in "Essays and Reviews," ii. 122; its
ulterior object, 123.
Denison, Archdeacon, his doctrine of the
Eucharist considered, i. 267, &c. ; erro-
neous interpretation of the Catechism,
271 ; his propositions irreconcilable with
one another, 272 ; uses language which
is the technical expression of a Romish
error, 273; his views of education ex-
amined, ii. 114-120.
INDEX.
301
Development, doetrine of, i. 59, 60 ; how
applied to establish the tenets of the
Church of Ronie, ib. ; Dr. Newman's
essay on, i. 102, &c.
Diocesan Church Union Society, i. 10 ;
Church Building Society, ii. 97.
Diocesan Inspector, appointment of, ii.
336.
Diocese of St. David's, condition of, i. 2,
4, 85, 86 ; neglect of Church order in
the, i. 67 ; condition of churches in the,
ii. 92 ; church building in, mainly
carried on by voluntary contributions,
95 j improvement in the, i. 142; poverty
of livings in, 146.
Dioceses, subdivision of, ii. 344.
" Directorium Anglicanum," the, ii. 158.
Disestablishment of the Church of Eng-
land, ii. 228 ; how viewed by the clergy
of different schools, 229 ; sources of
danger, 230 ; would involve disruption,
ib. ; advocacy of, by the Ritualists, ii.
310 ; disapproved by the bulk of the
clergy, 311. (See Irish Church. )
Divorce, law of, i. 289, 290.
Doctrine, definition of, i. 171 ; questions
of, in a court of law, ii. 134.
E.
Ecclesiastical Commission, aid to be ex-
pected from, i. 8.
Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, i. 180, 181.
Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Act, ii. 338.
Education, elementary, i. 310 ; committee
of Welsh, ib. ; religious instruction in
the Principality, 311 ; absence of a uni-
form system, 312; suggested action of
the Welsh bishops in order to secure
uniformity, 312 ; insufficient and ineffi-
cient schools, 313 ; remedies proposed,
ib. ; personal superintendence of the
clergy, 315; management clauses, 126 ;
misunderstanding respecting them, 127 ;
ii. 330 ; Act of 1870, ib. ; injurious effect
of denunciation of secular, 331 ; opera-
tion of the Act on religious, ib. ; Noncon-
formist support of secular, 332 ; Noncon-
formist protest against the exclusion of
the Bible, 334.
Education in the diocese, i. 128, &c. ;
reports of Commissioners, 129 ; effort for
the promotion of, 135 ; special fund
towards, 136 ; progress of, ii. 99.
Education of the poor, i. 19-24, 89, 235 ;
efforts of the Church, 90 ; encourage-
ments to the discharge of this duty, 91 ;
necessity of personal exertion, 92 ; re-
ligious instruction, 93.
Education, national, i. 117 ; government
control in, 118; separation of secular
and religious instruction, 119, 120 ;
importance of religious teaching, 121 ;
misunderstanding between the advocates
of the two systems, 122 ; action of the
government, 124 ; requires higher quali-
fications in the schoolmasters, 125 ; op-
position to the government scheme has
arisen entirely without the Church, 126,
336, &c. ; proceedings of Committee of
Council, 369 ; parliamentary grant, 370 ;
received by Dissenters in Church schools,
372, ii. 252 ; low state of, 253 ; moral
and religious training, ib. ; value of
secular, in checking crime, 254 ; line
drawn between secular and. religious,
255 ; provision for, in Wales, 256 ;
establishment of secular schools, 257 ;
duties of clergymen towards schools, ib.
Education, secular and religious, ii. 114-
116 ; of the children of Dissenters, 118,
119.
Education of the World, Essay on the, ii.
126.
Edward I. summons a Convocation of the
Clergy, i. 208.
Endowments, poverty of, in Wales, i. 7.
Endowed Schools Bill, i. 363 ; legislative
interference unnecessary, ib. ; operation
of, on national schools, 365.
English, teaching of, in Welsh schools, i.
133.
English Church Union, report of, on Ri-
tual, ii. 172.
Error, not a crime, i. 74 ; distinction be-
tween teaching it and allowing it to be
taught, 75.
Essays and Reviews, ii. 5 ; the work of
one school, ii. 51 ; general tendency of,
53 ; attention attracted to, by the cha-
racter of the authfirs, 7 ; obscurity in,
8 ; form and conditions of publication,
ib. ; relation of opinions expressed in, to
the doctrines of the Church, 9 ; unity of
the publication, 10; public history of
the book, ib. ; .attitude of the Church
towards, 11 ; the Bishops' censure of, 12-
13; apology for, in the Edinburgh Re-
view, 13 ; refutation demanded, 14 ;
clerical contributors to, 16 ; 'object of the
writers, 24; decision of the Judicial Com-
mittee on two of the contributors, ii. 122.
Establishments — see Church.
Eucharist, doctrine of the, in the Church
of England, i. 262 ; in primitive times,
263; language of the Reformers respect-
ing, ib. ; alleged want of explicitness in
the language of our Church, ^64 ; mys-
tical and spiritual tendencies concern-
ing, 265 ; importance of the questions
raised, ib. ; alleged Catholic doctrine of,
266 ; ambiguity of terms used, 267 ;
declaration of the Court at Bath, ib. ;
beginning of the controversies concern-
ing, i. 329 ; frequency of celebrating, i.
242 ; non-communicating attendance,
243, ii. 167; receiving of, by the priest
362
INDEX.
alone, 244 ; opinions of Bishop Cosin I
and Bishop Overall respecting, ib. ; re-
lation of the controversy to that on Bap-
tism, 283 ; spiritual presence of Christ
in, admitted by Beilarmine, i. 332 ;
Justin Martyr's account of the, ii.
186 ; minor differences between ancient
and modern usage, ib. ; memorial on
the, ii. 241 ; repudiates a corporal pre-
sence, 242, and transubstantiation, ib. ;
and innovations on the Eucharistic Sa-
crifice, 243 ; ignores different modes of
celebrating the Eucharist, 244 ; consis-
tency of its statements with the doctrine
of the Church, 245 ; words of institu-
tion in the, i. 246 ; adoration of the
elements in the, ii. 247.
Evangelical party, i. 30.
Evangelical party have introduced no
innovations, ii. 306.
F.
Figure, meaning of, i. 340.
Figura, opposed to Veritas, i. 336, 340.
Freeman, Archdeacon, his " Principles of
Divine Service " reviewed, i. 329, &c. ;
his doctrine of the Eucharist, 345.
G.
Gorham v. the Bishop of Exeter, case of,
i. 153 ; two questions involved, that of
doctrine, and that of jurisdiction, ib.
Gorham, Mr., his new of baptism, i.
156, 158 ; states what baptism does not
give, rather than what it does, 164 ;
contends against the unconditional effi-
cacy of baptism, 165.
Gorham ease, interest of, ii. 135.
H.
Habits, formation of, the chief thing in
education, i. 23, 123.
Haiino, i. 345.
Hammond, remarks on Preaching, i. 15.
Havelock, Sir Henry, his opinion of the
Church Service, i. 354.
Heresy, clause concerning, in Clergy Dis-
cipline Bill, i. 110.
Herman, Archbishop of Cologne, doctrine
of the Lord's Supper, ii. 200-202.
Hincmar supports Paschasius' view of the
Eucharist, i. 345.
Holy Communion, the doctrine of the,
contrasted with the Roinish mass, ii. 161.
Home missions, i. 225.
Hook, Dr., Letter to the Bishop of St.
David's, i. 120.
Hooker quoted, i. 47.
Horsley, Bishop, quoted, i. 33.
Hyacinthe, Father, language respecting
the Papacy, ii. 276, 277.
I.
Idiology expounded, ii. 43.
Idolatry, meaning of, i. 78, 79.
Immaculate Conception, doctrine of, i.
254, &c ; progress of belief in, 258 ;
effects of its promulgation, 259 ; his-
tory of the, i. 322, &c. ; the Pope's Cir-
cular, 323 ; popular ignorance abused,
325 ; various opinions as to the antiquity
of the festival, 326 ; various modes of
encouraging the belief in, 327 ; conclu-
sions of Archbishop Sibour respecting,
ib. ; definition of, ii. 270.
Infallibility of the Pope, i. 256 ; belief in,
ii. 275 ; real meaning of, 276 ; promul-
gation of, 291 ; precipitately decreed,
296 ; protest against, ib. ; truth of the
dogma, 297 ; novelty of the dogma, 298 ;
assurance given that it was no part of
the Catholic faith, ib. ; viewed in rela-
tion to ecclesiastical history, 299 ; bear-
ing on the world at large, 300 ; protest
against, in the Church of England, 303 ;
makes loyalty impossible to Roman
Catholics for the future, 302 ; likely to
widen the breach between us and Rome,
303.
Inspiration, not defined bv the Church, i.
294.
Inspiration, different views of, ii. 50.
Intolerance, prevalence of, i. 252, 253.
Ireland, union of, with England, ii, 208 ;
effected against the wish ot the majority,
210, 288 ; position of, at the Reforma-
tion, 209.
Iiish Church establishment, ii. 211;
opinion of foreigners on its abolition,
212 ; theory of, ib. ; attempt to vindi-
cate, 213; effects of, on the union, ib. ;
method of dealing with the surplus of
the property, 221 ; justice of disestab-
lishment, 222; effects of the disestablish-
ment, 223.
Irish Church, capacity of the, to maintain
its ground when disestablished, ii. 224 ;
its disestablishment viewed in relation
to the English Church, 225 ; essential
differences between the two, 226, 227.
Irish history", retrospect of, ii. 207.
J.
Jesuits, influence of the, ii. 277.
Judicial Committee of Privy Council, sen-
tence of, not opposed to the Nicene
Creed, i. 168 ; decision in the Gorham
case, i. 170 ; does not sanction heresy,
ib. ; wisdom of the decision, 171 ; its
rule for dealing with charges of heresy,
ii. 73.
Judicial decisions, bearing of, on theologi-
cal works, ii. 15 ; on the character of
the Church, ib.
Justification, doctrine of, i. 32, 34.
K.
Kneeling, the declaration on, ii. 248, 284.
JNDEX.
363
L.
Laborde, L'Abbe, bis work on the Immacu-
late Conception, i. 255.
Laity, co-operation of, to be secured by
the clergy, i. 10 ; regarded the Oxford
movement with alarm, i. CI ; admission
of, to Synods, ii. 124 ; recognised in
the Reformatio Legtm, 125 ; difficulty of
securing a representation of, ib. ; exclu-
sion of, from doctrinal decisions, 133.
Laufranc, Dc Corpore et Sanguine Domini,
i. 338.
Lay co-operation, i. 225.
Lessing on the Relation of the Bible to
Religion, ii. 78.
Liberation Society, the, i. 360 : its objects,
361 ; its mode of operation, 362.
Libraries and reading societies, i. 13.
Liturgy, importance of, i. 16; revision of
the, i. 65 ; rendered necessary by lapse
of time, 66 ; proposed, 374 ; rejection of
motion for a Royal Commission, 375 ;
causes of the rejection, 376 ; the question
at issue, 377 ; alteration made on the
second motion, 378 ; attempt to ascertain
whether the clergy desired a renewal of
the motion, 379 ; declaration against
revision signed by 10,000 of the clergy,
379, 389; opinion of Convocation, 381 ;
statement respecting it [erroneous, ib. ;
Convocation not inconsistent, 382 ; nor
the Bishop, 384, 385 ; how far desirable,
ib. ; provision for special services, i. 383 ;
shortening of the Morning Serv ice, 386,
390 ; circumstances to be taken into
account, ib.; retrenchment of repetition,
387 ; administration of Holy Com-
munion, 389 ; occasional services, 390 ;
memorial on the Burial Office, 391 ;
Ordination of Priests, 393 ; Visitation of
the Sick, 394 ; Athanasian Creed, ib. ;
real aim of proposed revision, 396; argu-
ments for, 397 ; proposal for State inter-
ference, 398, and for superseding Con-
vocation, ib.,- deprecation of such
measures, 399 ; the 29th Canon, ib. ;
proposed "purification" of, i. 283 ; pre-
text for, 284 ; if attempted, would pre-
vent beneficial changes, 285 ; attempt
to conform it to the Romish mass, ii.
159.
Liturgy, need of a, felt by Nonconformists,
i. 242 ; and by German Protestants, ib.
liivings, augmentation of small, by the
Bishop, i. 150.
Lord's Supper, change in the administra-
tion of the, ii. 158. (See also Eucharist.)
Iff.
MacColl, Mr., his reckless charges against
Bishop Jeremy Taylor, and Bishop
Thirlwall, ii. 352, 353.
Mass, Sacrifice of the, i. 245, ii. 193, &c,
199 ; service of the, i. 78 ; the doc-
trine of the, ii. 168. (See also Tran-
substantiation, Real Presence, Eucha-
rist.)
Masses, origin of solitary, ii. 168.
Mariolatry, impulse given to, by the title
OtoTOKog, ii. 32.
Maynooth Grant, i. 69, &c. ; inconsistency
of opposition to it, i. 73, 74 ; an act
of justice, 80 ; likely to do not harm,
but good, ib. ; a reversal of a mischievous
policy, 81 ; its probable results, ib.
Medd, Mr., on the Eucharistic Sacrifice, ii.
193.
Ministry, practical hints for the, i. 50, 51.
Miracles, denial of, ii. 16 ; bearing of, upon
our Lord's person, 22 ; accepted for the
sake of the moral lesson, 31 ; argument
from, ii. 86, &c.
Missionary work, i. 95.
Morley, Mr. S., on Church Rates, i. 360,
361.
Mortara case, the, ii. 120.
Mosaic Cosmogony, essay on the, ii. 49.
Music, vocal, importance of, in education,
i. 21.
N.
Natal, Bishop of, see Colenso.
National church, theory of, in Essays and
Reviews, ii. 37-40 ; Calvinistic opinions
adverse to, 42 ; drift of the theory, 47.
National schools in Wales, improvement
in, i. 139. (Seo Education.)
Neology of the day, inquiry into, ii. 4.
Newman, Dr. J. H., i. 32.
Nicene Creed, objections to the, met by
Athanasius, ii. 321.
Non-communicating attendance, ii. 167.
Nonconformists, rolation of, to National
schools, ii. 109 ; pi-otest of, against the
exclusion of the Bible from elementary
schools, ii. 333, 334 ; practice of, with
regard to subscription to formularies, ii.
59; recognition bjvof the need of a
Liturgy, i. 242.
Nonconformity, changed aspect of, i. 5 ;
its hostility to the Church, ib. ; pre-
valence of, i. 2 ; how to be accounted
for, i. 3 ; in many respects salutary, ib.
Norris, Canon, on Religious Education, ii.
255.
North sido of tho table, argument on the,
ii. 149, 150.
O.
Objective, meaning of the word, ii. 242.
Offertory, i. 68.
Old Catholics, relation of, to our own
Church, ii. 303.
Opinion, freedom of, in the Church, i. 49.
Ordination of Priests, i. 393.
Ornaments Rubric, ii. 158, 235.
304
INDEX.
Oxford movement, the, its alleged tendency
to Romanism, i. 56.
Oxford Tracts, i. 24.
P.
Papacy, position of the, i. 348.
Papal prerogative, the, ii. 266, 276.
Parishes, wide extent of, i. 8.
Parsonage houses, the Bishop's fund for the
building of, ii. 98.
Pascal, remarks on. the Unity of Mankind,
ii. 27.
Paschasius Radbertus, quoted, i. 250 ;
teaches transubstantiation, i. 329, &c.
Pastoral ministrations, i. 17, 18.
Pentateuch, the Mosaic authorship of the,
ii. 74 ; historical truth of, 75.
Physical science, ii. 6 ; Prince Metternich
on the study of, ib. ; relation to faith,
17.
Pope, the, styled Yice-God, ii. 277-
Popes, amendment in the character of the,
ii. 269 ; hostility of, to religious liberty,
271.
Powell, Prof. Baden, Essay on Miracles,
ii. 16, 26 ; his view of miracles, ii. 86.
Prayer for the dead, i. 45.
Prayer Book, assent to, i. 113, 114; re-
sources of the, ii. 155 ; free use of, i.
224 ; importance of adhering to the, i.
18.
Prayer meetings, i. 17.
Prfemunientes, clause of, i. 210, 213.
Presence, meaning of, ii. 242, 243.
Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, ii.
247 ; a local, 248.
Presence, spiritual, ii. 357.
Propitiatory, meaning of the term, ii, 165.
Protestantism, misuse of the word, i.
48.
Pusey, Dr., promulges a new canon of
discipline for the clergy, ii. 319 ; his
interpretation of the phrase " sacrifices
of masses," ii. 192; his "Eirenicon,"
175, 192; "The Presence of Christ in
the Holy Encharist," i. 266.
Public worship, Royal Commission on,
ii. 315; changes introduced in, i. 62;
revival of obsolete rites in, 63 ; import-
ance of avoiding offence in, 64.
Q.
Queen Anne's Bounty, ii. 339.
R.
Iiatherius of Verona supports Paschasius'
view of the Eucharist, i. 345.
Ritraninus, i. 329, &c, 339, 342, 343 ; his
doctrine of the Eucharist, the same as
that of the Church ot England, 344.
Real objective presence, the, ii. 241 ;
the visible presence, 313. (See Pre-
sence.)
Real presence, meaning of the term, i.
240; Capernaite notion of, 241 ; Hooker's
view of, 246, 248 ; local limitation of,
270 ; the phrase foreign to the Church
of England, i. 275 ; real distinguished
from natural, ib., 276 ; importance of
acknowledging, 277 ; importance at-
tached to the doctrines of the, ii.
249.
Reformation, attempts to undo the work of
the, i. 57 ; Romish views of, 284,
285.
Reformers, the, language used respecting
them, i, 46, 48.
Regeneration, whether distinct from con-
version, i. 163 ; Hammond's use of the
terms, ib. ; meaning of, i. 117, 155, 160,
163. (See Baptism.)
Religion, distinction between natural and
revealed, ii. 33 ; in what sense revealed,
ii. 79.
Renan, estimate of our Lord's character,
ii. 23.
Reserve in communicating religious know-
ledge, i. 40, 41.
Resurrection of Christ, its place in Chris-
tianity, ii. 55.
Revised Code, effects of the, ii. 100 ; on
training colleges, 102; on the labouring
classes, 103.
Revision of the Bible, ii. 316.
Ritual, the question of, ii. 145 ; its past
history, 146 ; lawfulness of ritualistic
observances, 147 ; legal opinion on, 148 ;
how received by Ritualists, ib. ; advan-
tage accruing from, 150; debate on, in
the Lower House of Convocation, 160 ;
Committee of Convocation on, ii. 180 ;
cases in which judicial proceedings would
be necessary, 181 ; the only remedy-
suggested, 182 ; conclusion arrived at,
183 ; jealousy awakened in Churchmen
of an opposite school, 184; Royal Com-
mission on, 252.
Ritualism, missionary aspect of, ii. 153 ;
arguments in support of, 159 ; symbolism
of, 161 ; spread of, 169; Romeward tend-
ency of, denied, 169 ; recent phases of,
ii. 231 ; application of the Fine Arts to
religion, 232 ; how far beneficial, 233 ;
the real question at issue, ib. ; appoint-
ment of a Royal Commission, 237 ;
Romeward tendency of, ii. 177; probable
consequences of, in its effect on Church-
men, 178 ; onDissenters, 179; a reaction,
183.
Ritualists, extravagant licence of, ii. 149 ;
glaringly deficient in impartiality, ib. ;
character of the leaders, 157 ; Romaniz-
ing tendencies of, 161; repudiation of
Romish doctrine by, 163; vestments, use
INDEX.
365
of, ii. 151, 152, 159 ; designs of, ii. 306 ; |
tend necessarily to litigation, 307 ;
claims of, to be the followers of the old
Traetarians, 308 ; difference between the
two, ib.
Roman Catholic clergy, education of, i.
76.
Romanizing tendencies, i. 188 ; ii. 1G0.
Romanism, conversions to, i. 57, 58.
Rome, Church of, has no security against
change, i. 185 ; policy of, 189 ; secessions
to, i. 101 ; influences at work, i. 106,
107.
Romish aggression, i. 180 ; controversy,
work on, recommended to the Clergy, i.
189.
Romish doctrine, meaning of the term, i.
44 ; claim to teach, by ministers of the
Church of England, i. 57 ; approxima-
tion to, i. 269.
Royal prerogative, exercise of, i. 210.
Rubric, the, i. 54 ; obedience to, 62, 63 ;
observance of the, i. 67 ; departures
from, i. 16, 17 ; right of forming an in-
dividual opinion upon, ii. 234 ; bishops
cannot modify or dispense with, 236 ;
reconciliation of, with Church practice,
ii. 151.
Rural Deans, i. 12 ; i. 149.
Ruridecanal Conferences, i. 12 ; possess an
advantage over Diocesan Synods, ii.
128.
S.
Sacrament, definition of the word, i. 271 ;
difference between the sacramental sym-
bol, and the sacramental rite, ib. ;
objective reality in, 277 ; may be robbed
of its specific character, 277 ; Court at
Bath, its exposition of the, (28th and
29th Articles not binding upon the
Church, i. 274.
Sacraments, efficacy of, i. 39 ; doctrine of,
in the Catechism, i. 112.
Sacrifice, the propitiatory, of the mass, ii.
165 ; identical with the doctrine of the
Ritualists, 166 ; contrary to the Church
of England, ib.
Sacrifices of masses, and the Sacrifice of
the mass, attempt to distinguish between,
ii. 192, &c.
Sacrilege, what constitutes, ii. 220.
Sancta Clara, Franciscus a, his interpreta-
tion of the 28th Article, i. 241.
Scepticism and credulity, combination of,
i. 105.
Scepticism traced to an enlargement of
geographical knowledge, ii. 48.
Schism, danger of, i. 5 ; schools, circulat-
ing, i. 20.
School Boards, ii. 336 : diocesan return
respecting, 337.
Scotch Communion office, i. 280, 281.
Schoolmaster, proper functions of the, ii.
334.
Schools, building of, i. 145 ; schools, na-
tional, how affected by Endowed Schools
Bill, i. 365; Mr. Bowstead's report on,
366, &c. ; schools, establishment of, i.
314.
Schwarz, Dr. Carl, " Predigten aus der
Gegenwart," ii. 55.
Services, provision for special, i. 286, 383 ;
revision of occasional, 390.
Scripture and tradition, i. 103 ; Scripture,
supremacy of, i. 295 ; infallibility of, 296 ;
relation of, to the Church, 302 ; grounds
of its claim to reverence, 304.
Scripture, divine and human element in,
ii. 50 ; free inquiry in the study of, 61 ;
its relation to tradition, i. 34 ; how to
be interpreted, 35 ; the principle of the
Anglican Church, 36 ; appeal to antiquity
for its interpretation, how to be under-
stood, 36, 37 ; the sole authoritative
source of the faith, 37 ; language of the
Church of England respecting, ii. 70 ;
arguments grounded on, inadmissible in
law, 72, 73.
Simon, M. Jules, on Natural Religion, ii.
46.
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel,
i. 96, 97, 319.
Spiritual wants of the people, report of
Committee of Convocation on, i. 224,
225.
Spirituality, identified with the Church,
ii. 133, 141.
St. David's college, Lampeter, i. 10, 94.
St. Francis of Assisi, his authority pleaded
against the private mass, ii. 195.
St. Peter, primacy of, ii. 262.
Stanley, A. P., letter on Subscription, ii.
57.
State, relation of, to the Church, ii. 40 ;
duty of the, towards different religious
bodies, i. 71 ; duty of the, in questions of
religion, i. 71 ; may be compelled to sup-
port error, 72.
Strauss, view of the person of Christ, ii.
44.
Stuart, Mr., "Thoughts on Low Masses,"
ii. 196, 198.
Subscription, Clerical, ii. 144 ; object of
the Act, ib. ; subscription to the Articles,
ii. 37 ; subscription to formularies, ii.
57 ; efficacy of, 58 ; practice among
Nonconformists, ib. ; in foreign Churches,
59.
Supernatural agency, possibility of, ii. 31 ;
Renan on the meaning of the term,
32.
Surplice, use of the, i. 68.
Syllabus, doctrines of the, ii. 273.
Synod, no means of assembling a national,
ii. 136; unfitted for discussing questions
306
INDEX.
of doctrine, ib. ; synods, Gregory Nazi-
anzen on, i. 176 ; summoned by bishops,
178 ; synod, the Pan- Anglican, ii. 259,
260 ; synods, diocesan, ii. 345 ; revival
of, ii. 123, &c. ; admission of laymen to,
125 ; functions of, ib. ; relation of a
bishop to, 126, 127 ; purpose for which
they are adapted, 129 ; objects contem-
plated by their restoration, 130 ; pro-
bable influence on the case of " Essays
and Reviews," 131 ; inefficacy if opposed
to the Judicial Committee, 132.
T.
Ta}'lor, Bishop Jeremy, objects to the
damnatory clauses of the Quicimque vult,
ii. 322 ; on our Lord's human nature, ii.
77; assailed by Mr. MacColl, ii. 352,
&c.
Temple, Dr., essay on the Education of
the World, ii. 26.
Temporal power of the Pope, probable
effect of its loss, ii. 30.
Tendencies of Religious Thought in Eng-
land, essay on, ii. 49.
Theology and law, ii. 134.
Tradition, its relation to Scripture, i.
34.
Training colleges, bearing of the revised
code on, ii. 102 ; importance of, ii.
335.
Training College, the, at Carmarthen, i.
137.
Transubstantiation, i. 240, 241 ; two defi-
nitions of, by the Council of Trent, 249 ;
affirmed by Paschasius Radbertus, i.
336, &c; transubstantiation, ii. 242, 281 ;
distinction between the natural body of
Christ, and the natural mode of its exist-
ence, 282 ; Council of Trent on, ib., 283 ;
what is the exact doctrine of the Church
of Rome, 283 ; extravagance of, 287, ii.
163 ; in what light regarded by the
Church of England, 164 ; metaphysical
difficulty involved in, ii. 190-192.
Tract XC, i. 42 ; its interpretation of the
Thirty-first Article, ii. 192.
Tractarian controversy, i. 24 ; not a sub-
ject of universal regret, 25 ; has called
forth valuable literature, ib. ; led to a
wider study of theology, 26 ; awakened
an earnest practical spirit, ib. ; fears
entertained respecting it, 27 ; the con-
troversy not really new, ib. ; origin of
the Oxford movement, 28 ; a reac-
tion, 29 ; system to which it is opposed,
29, 30 ; differences among those who
have engaged in the movement, 31 ;
amount of departure from the doctrines
of the Church, 32.
Truth, different aspects of, i. 47.
D.
Unbelief, in what sense sinful, ii. 323-325.
Uniformity, proposed amendment of the
Act, ii. 55, 56 ; Uniformity, Act of,
Amendment of the, ii. 340.
Union, necessity of, i. 400 ; between clergy
and laity, ii. 348.
Unity, importance of, i. 100.
Unity of Christendom may be purchased
too dearly, ii. 304,
Unity of aim, ii. 349.
Unity of Christendom, Association for the
Promotion of the, ii. 170 ; object of, 171 ;
condemned at Rome, ib. ; hopelessness
of the scheme, ib.
Unity with Rome, on the basis of common
doctrine, ii. 173 ; difficulties in the way,
174-176 ; unity of Christendom, ii. 172.
V.
Vatican Council, the, not (Ecumenical, ii.
291 ; convoked under different circum-
stances from the Council of Trent, 292 ;
excludes a large part of the Christian
world, 293 ; object in convoking, ib. ;
not free, 294 ; order of proceeding, 295 ;
pressure exercised by the Pope, 296 ;
character of the Council, 297, ii. 260 ;
not an opportunity for reconciliation
with Rome, 264 ; object of the, 271, 272 ;
Rome, reunion with, ii. 261 ; not de-
pendent on the Pope, 263 ; prospect of,
269 ; duty of English churchmen with
regard to the, ii. 275.
Vestments, discussion upon, ii. 239 ; of
the Primitive Church, 240.
Virgin Mary, worship of the, l. 78 ;
prayer to the, ii. 197. (See Immaculate
Conception.)
Visitation of the sick, absolution in the
office for, i. 394.
Voluntary principle, the, i. 354.
Vulgate, the, imposed by the Church of
Rome as authentic scripture, ii. 267.
W.
Wales, moral condition of, i. 132, 133.
Welsh sees, proposal to unite the sees of
Bangor and St. Asaph, i. 82, 83.
Welsh language, instruction in, i. 21.
Welsh nonconformity, origin of, ii. 227.
Wilberforce, Archdeacon, on the Eucharist,
i. 239 ; object of the treatise, 242.
William the Conqueror, his ecclesiastical
policy, i. 206.
Williams, Rev. Rowland, memorial charg-
ing him with false doctrine, i. 291 ;
reasons for not acceding to it, ib. ; diffi-
culties involved in the case, 292 ; dis-
tinctions to be kept in view, 293 ; expla-
nation given by the author, 297 ; his
definition of revelation, 299 ; doctrine of
INDEX.
367
inspiration, 300 ; claims the authority of
the Church in his favour, 301 ; view of
the relation of Scripture to the Church,
303, 304 ; of Judaism to Christianity,
305 ; of the work of the Holy Spirit,
306 ; its relation to the incarnation, 307 ;
essay on Bunsen, ii. 30, &c. ; philosophy
of, 34.
Wilson, Kev. H., essay on National
Churches, ii. 35, &c. ; relation of the
essay to that on Miracles, 48 ; speech
before the Judicial Committee of the
Privy Council, ii. 87.
Word of God, meaning of the phrase, ii.
71.
END OF VOL. IT.
PRINTED BY VIRTUE AND CO., LTJOTBD, CITY ROAD, LONDON.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11