and so long as those data are honestly acknow ledged, much difference of opinion is allowable, but in either advocating or refuting an opinion under these circumstances no one has a right to speak of his opponent as a heretic, since heresy means, in fact, the denial of the acknowledged data. Much confusion has been caused in the minds of men by their supposing that the religionists of England are to be divided, so far as principles are concerned, into two classes only, whereas, in point of fact, we are divided into three;-the Churchman, who may, from his avoiding the errors of the two opposite extremes, be called both a Protestant and a Catholic; the Romish Dissenter or Papist; the Protestant Dissenter or UltraProtestant. And union among these can never be expected by wise and practical men, until, as distinct classes, two of them become extinct by merging into the third; that is, until their distinct and distinguishing principles cease to exist. The origin of this threefold division is to be traced to the Reformation, and to the manner in which that great movement was conducted in this country. No view can be more erroneous than that which would regard the English Reformers as men, who, having devised a peculiar system of theology, were determined to supplant the established system that they might put their own in its place. Their object was simple, intelligible, and practical: it was to correct abuses in the existing Catholic Church, which had come down to them from their ancestors, and of which they were themselves the bishops and spiritual pastors. Those abuses,-deviations from the real principles of the Church,-were gradually discovered, and, as from time to time they were brought to light, it was the endeavour of our Reformers gradually, and as opportunity occurred to supply a remedy by regular and canonical means. From the commencement to the conclusion of their holy work, they indignantly repudiated the idea of their wish to overturn one Church and to establish another; a charge continually brought against them by the advocates of Popery. For example, in the reign of Henry VIII. it was enacted that neither the King, his successors, nor his subjects should apply to the Bishop of Rome for any dispensation, faculty, or delegacy. This was the first blow at the Papal usurpations in this country: but, anticipating the kind of attack which would be made by the partizans of Rome, and to prevent misconstruction and misrepresentation, it is expressly provided that "nothing in this act shall be interpreted as if the King and his subjects intended to decline or vary from the congregation of Christ's Church in any thing concerning the very articles of the Catholic faith* in Christendom, or in any other things declared by Holy Scripture and the Word of God necessary for their sal *Note A. vation." In the orders for regulating the pulpit, in 1535, the clergy are directed to pray for the Catholic Church of Christ, and of this our Catholic Church of England our Sovereign Lord King Henry VIII. is declared to be immediately under God the supreme head.2 And Tonstal, in his Letter to Cardinal Pole, explains very clearly the intention which at this period of the Reformation existed: "To the charge," he says, "of the King's departing from the Catholic communion, his Highness is much injured by the imputation; for it has all along been his practice to adhere to the unity of the Catholic Church, to maintain the ancient doctrine, and to conform to the worship and ecclesiastical government of the rest of Christendom." "It is true," he continues, "that he has rescued the English Church from the encroachments of the Court of Rome, but if this be singularity, he deserves commendation, for the King has only reduced matters to their original state, and helped the English Church to her ancient freedom." At the trial of Lambert, in 1538, the Reformation had considerably advanced, but still on the same principles; for Day, Bishop of Chichester, in the speech by which the trial was opened, observed that the King had thrown off the usurpations of the See of Rome, discharged some idle monks, renounced the idolatrous regard for images, published the Bible in English, and made Collier, ii. 100. Collier, Eccles. Hist. ii. 84. 85. some lesser alterations in the Church, but that he was nevertheless resolved to keep constant to the Catholic faith and custom. And in the spring of 1543, the act for the advancement of true religion and the abolishment of the contrary, declared it to be expedient to "ordain and establish a certain form of pure and sincere teaching, agreeable to God's word and the true doctrine of the Catholic and Apostolic Church."* The facts here stated are sufficient to shew that the holy work of Church Reformation, if gradual, had still been great and effectual even in Henry's reign; in that of Edward, our Reformers proceeded more rapidly and did some things, perhaps, inconsiderately, but still the same principle was professed. In his speech at the opening of the Convocation we find the Archbishop of Canterbury, Cranmer, exhorting the Clergy to advance further in the Reformation,—but how? by throwing off some unprimitive remains. And by the statute of 1547, which sanctioned the giving of the Eucharist in both kinds, a reference is made, in justification of the proceeding, to the common use and practice both of the Apostles and of the primitive Christians by the space of 500 years. In the King's injunction against images, it is stated as a reason that "the Catholic Church made use of no representations of this kind for many years.' the Act of Uniformity, after alluding to the • Collier, ii. 151. • Jenkyn's Cranmer, i. 36. In דיי Collier, ii. 233. various Rituals and Liturgies at that time used in England, it is affirmed that his Majesty appointed the Archbishop of Canterbury, with several others of the most learned Bishops and Divines, to draw up an office for all parts of divine service, and that in doing so they were to have regard to the directions of the Holy Scripture and the usages of the primitive Church. In reply to the demands of the Devonshire rebels, Archbishop Cranmer, acting authoritatively, particularly insisted to them "that the practice and belief of the Church of England was agreeable to the decisions of the general councils, while the decrees they (the rebels) talked of were mere stretches of the Court of Rome to enslave the rest of Christendom."9 Again, in the answer of the King's Council to the Princess, afterwards Queen Mary, in 1551, penned most probably by the Archbishop of Canterbury and by Ridley Bishop of London, it is averred, "that the English Reformation had recovered the worship to the directions of Scripture, and the usage of the primitive Church."10 And when the Prayer Book was translated and corrected and brought to its present form, it was recommended by the Clergy to the laity in these words: "Here you have an order of Prayer, and for the reading of Scripture, much agreeable to the mind and purposes of the old fathers:"* and as such it was received by the laity; it was received as "a very • Collier, ii. 263. Collier, ii. 271. 10 Collier, ii. 311. *Preface to the Prayer Book. |