PREFACE. THE movement that has lately taken place in our Church under the auspices of the Authors of the Tracts for the Times, whatever may be the view taken of it, must be admitted to be one of a very important kind. Whether for good or evil, the degree of development it has already attained, amply shows that its success must be attended with a great and thorough change in the principles and practices of our Church in various most important points. That such would be the case, was for a long time studiously concealed from public view. So much caution, indeed, was exercised in the earlier part of their career by the Tractators, that to none but those who were somewhat acquainted with the controversial writings of divines on the points touched upon, so as to see the full force and tendency of the terms used, was it apparent whither they were going; though to such, I may add, it was abundantly evident. And the first intimation of it to the public mind was in the very seasonable publication of Mr. Froude's Remains, a work which clearly and most opportunely revealed the real spirit and views of the (to use Mr. Froude's own term) "conspirators" against the present order of things in our Church. As time has advanced, and the number of their adherents increased, the reserve formerly practised has been gradually thrown aside. Perhaps, indeed, their own views have become more fixed and definite than when they commenced their labours. And we are far from laying to their charge any other concealment than such as they judged to be wise and prudent for the inculcation of new and unpalatable truths; though we may be pardoned for observing, that a more open course appears to us to be (to use a mild term) much freer from objec It is now, then, openly avowed, that the Articles, though "it is notorious that they were drawn up by Protestants and intended for the establishment of Protestantism," are not to be interpreted according to "the known opinions of their framers," but in what the Tractators are pleased to call a "Catholic" sense,1 which interpretation we are informed "was intended to be admissible, though not that which their authors took themselves," in order to "comprehend those who did not go so far in Protestantism as themselves;" though the Articles are said, in the very title prefixed to them, to have been drawn up "for the avoiding of diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true religion ;" and were put forth in compliance with the request of the lower House of Convocation, "that certain articles containing the principal grounds of the Christian religion be set forth, as well to determine the truth of things this day in controversy, as also to show what errors are chiefly to be eschewed." And the "Declaration" prefixed to the Articles, requiring them to be interpreted in the "literal and grammatical sense,' "sanctions" such a mode of interpretation." That is, the "literal and grammatical sense" comprehends that "uncatholic" and Protestant doctrine against which the Tractators protest, and also that opposite catholic" doctrine which they embrace. And this catholic" doctrine is such as is consistent with the decrees of the Council of Trent. And the Declaration, forbidding any person to "affix any new sense to any article," "was promulgated," we are told, "at a time when the leading men of our Church were especially noted for catholic views." But surely, if the "literal and grammatical sense" of the Articles comprehends so much as the Tractators suppose, and men had all along subscribed the Articles with propriety, though varying in their sentiments from the Protestantism of Bishop Jewell, to the "Catholicism" which squared with the Decrees of the Council of Trent, it was rather a useless admonition, for the wit of man could hardly devise a sense of the Articles not to be found within such an extensive range as this. 66 And the very men, be it observed, who say that these Articles, carefully drawn up for the establishment of Protestantism," will bear meanings ranging from Protestantism to that Anti-protestantism that agrees with the decisions of the Council of Trent, tell us, that in the writings of the Fathers, a representation of the orthodox faith is to be found, so clearly and 1 No. 90. p. 80. 2 Ib. p. 81. 2d edit. p. 82. 3 Wilk. Conc. iv. 240. 6 Ib. p. 80. 7 The opposition of which to the catholicism of the Tractators may be judged of by an article in the British Critic for July, 1841. definitely delivered in the consentient testimony of all of them, that so far from there being any uncertainty as to their meaning, the orthodox faith as thus delivered is "an obvious historical fact;" from which flows the very convenient consequence, that he who follows it has all the benefit of infallibility without incurring the odium of claiming it.1 172 Moreover, to talk of the blessings of emancipation from the Papal yoke,' "" is to use a phrase of a "bold and UNDUTIFUL tenour." "To call the earlier reformers martyrs, is to beg the question, which of course Protestants do not consider a question; but which no one pretending to the name of Catholic can for a moment think of conceding to them, viz. whether that for which these persons suffered were the truth.'" "Protestantism, in its essence, and in all its bearings, is characteristically the religion of corrupt human nature." "The Protestant tone of docThe reader will trine and thought is essentially antichristian." observe, that the term used in these denunciations is no longer, as at first, "ultra-Protestantism," but (with a candour which we should have been glad to have seen from the commencement) "Protestantism." The present feelings and objects of the Tractators have been clearly set forth by themselves in the following words. "By clinging to the authority of these reformers, as individuals," they say, "are we not DEALING UNFAIRLY both with Protestants and other branches of the Catholic Church? Are we not holding out false colours to the former, and drawing them near us, only in the end to be alienated from us more completely than ever? On the other hand, are we not cutting ourselves off from the latter, (who are our natural allies,) by making common cause with A SET OF WRITERS WITH WHOM, IN SUCH MEASURE AS WE HAVE IMBIBED THE TRUE CATHOLIC SPIRIT, WE CAN HAVE NO SORT OF SYM PATHY? Meanwhile, to the unprejudiced inquirers after truth (a large and growing number) are we not, until we have shaken off such auxiliaries as these, exhibiting a very distorted and unreal representation of the Catholicism to which we desire to attract them; holding before them a phantom which will elude their grasp, a light which will cheat their pursuit; unsettling their early prepossessions, without affording a complete and satisfactory equivalent; disquieting them in their present home, without furnishing them even with a shelter? This should be well considered. It ought not to be for nothing; no, nor for any thing short of some very vital truth; some truth not to be rejected 1 See Newman's Lect. pp. 224, 5. 2 Brit. Crit. July, 1841. p. 2. without fatal error, nor embraced without radical change; that persons of name and influence should venture upon the part of ecclesiastical agitators;' intrude upon the peace of the contented, and raise doubts in the minds of the uncomplaining; vex the Church with conntroversy, alarm serious men, and interrupt the established order of things; set the 'father against the son, and the mother against the daughter;' and lead the taught to say, 'I have more understanding than my teacher.' ALL THIS HAS BEEN DONE; and all this is worth hazarding in a matter of life and death; much of it is predicted as the characteristic result, and therefore the sure criterion, of the Truth. An object thus momentous we believe to be the UNPROTESTANTIZING (to use an offensive but forcible word) of the national Church; and accordingly we are ready to endure, however we may lament, the undeniable, and in themselves disastrous, effects of the pending controversy.. We cannot stand where we are, we must go backwards or forwards; and it will surely be the latter. It is absolutely necessary towards the consistency of the system which certain parties are labouring to restore, that truths should be clearly stated, which as yet have been but intimated, and others developed, which are now but in germ. AND AS WE GO ON, WE MUST RECEDE MORE AND MORE FROM The principlesS, IF ANY SUCH THERE BE, of the EngLISH REFORMATION."1 Such is the language now held by the Tractators, in their organ the British Critic. Now if by "we" in this passage they mean themselves, it is only what all who really understood their principles foresaw from the commencement of their career. But if by "we" they mean the English Church, then we trust that they will find that there is much difference between the temporary impression produced by taking men by surprise under "fulse colours," and that which is made by the power of truth, accompanied by the blessing of God. That the English Church is to go "forwards" with the Tractators into all the false doctrines and mummeries of Popery now openly advocated by them, even to the primary false principle, that the Church ought to assume the appearance of one great spiritual monarchy, with the Pope at the head of it, is, we trust a prediction that has little probability of being realized. It is, if possible, still more painful to contemplate the fact, 1 British Critic for July 1841, pp. 44, 45. 2 "Of course, union of the whole Church under one visible government is abstractedly the most perfect state. We were so united, and now are not. And the history of this great struggle for religious independence. . is, in any case, the record of the origin and progress of that deplorable schism. We talk of the blessings of emancipation from the Papal yoke,' and use other phrases of a like bold and UNDUTIFUL tenour."-Brit. Crit. for July 1841, p. 2. ... |