A Letter to the Right Rev. Father in God, Richard, Lord Bishop of Oxford, on the Tendency to Romanism Imputed to Doctrines Held of Old, as Now, in the English Church

maintain it are, in one large country of the reformation, a proscribed sect. Mostly, it has amalgamated itself with the Calvinistic doctrine. Shrinking then from saying any thing as to GOD's dealings with individuals, it would yet seem that, upon their own scheme of doctrine, the Holy Eucharist must be to many bodies, at least, other than it is to us. For what we believe it to be, that they reject. They do not believe that it conveys really, though spiritually, the Body and Blood of CHRIST; painful as it is to say, they repudiate as Popish, the real, invisible, Presence of CHRIST; they resolve into a figure the real actual Indwelling of CHRIST thereby. Since then faith is the means, whereby we become partakers of the gifts already stored up for us, what would there be harsh or unkind in thinking that they had not, what they deny themselves to have? especially when our object is to persuade them to return where they may believe and may have it? It is the substance of their own statement, when one says, in a passage1 singled out for blame, "In the judg"ment of the Church, the Eucharist administered "without Apostolical commission, may to pious "minds be a very edifying ceremony, but it is not "that blessed thing which our Saviour graciously "meant it to be; it is not verily and indeed taking "and receiving' the Body and Blood of Him, our "Incarnate Lord." For they themselves so speak of

1 Tract 66. p. 7.

it, as an outward means to kindle faith; they place the very essence of Sacraments in their instructiveness1; what injury then is done them, if any say that they have not, what they refuse? or why may we not claim to our own Church, what she professes to receive from GOD's all-gracious hand? What they claim, is not denied them; we trust that the "edifying rite" which they hold the Communion to be, may be, by God's mercy, beneficial to them; why should they grudge us its being to us "that blessed

thing which we believe our Saviour graciously meant "it to be." If they will not "enter in themselves," why should they "hinder those who are entering?"

This view of the case, whereby we are enabled to maintain uncompromisingly the truth, and yet to entertain kindly and charitable and sympathetic feelings for those who have lost some of the privileges of our Church, is so fully and so tenderly put by the great Bramhall, that I would again extract his words; and our previous selection of them might have shown people our sentiments, would they have read before they blamed.

"But 2 because I esteem them Churches not com"pletely formed, do I, therefore, exclude them from

1 See Scriptural Views of Holy Baptism, p. 122-4. 245. ed. 1. 2 Vindication of the Church of England, disc. 3. quoted more fully Tracts, No. 74. Catena on the "Apostolical succession," p. 12, 13. It appears from Abp. Bramhall, that the charge of want of charity for maintaining the Apostolical succession was then brought by the Romanists.

"all hopes of salvation? or esteem them aliens from "the commonwealth of Israel? or account them "formal schismatics? No such thing. First, I know "there are many learned persons among them who "do passionately affect Episcopacy; some of which "have acknowledged it to myself, that their Church "would never be rightly settled, until it was new "moulded'. Baptism is a Sacrament, the door of Christianity, a matriculation into the Church of "Christ: yet the very desire of it in case of necessity, "is sufficient to excuse from the want of actual Baptism. And is not the desire of Episcopacy "sufficient to excuse from the actual want of Episcopacy, in like case of necessity? or should I censure these as schismatics?

Secondly, there are others, who though they do "not long so much for Episcopacy, yet they approve

it, and want it only out of invincible necessity. "In some places the sovereign is of another com"munion; the Episcopal chairs are filled with Roman

Bishops. If they should petition for Bishops of "their own, it would not be granted. In other places the magistrates have taken away Bishops; whether out of policy, because they thought that

'It were difficult to point out the difference between this admission of the "Reformed" themselves, and a saying of Mr. Froude's, selected for censure, as referring to the "Reformation, 66 every where but in England." (Essays, p. 285.) "The reforma"tion was a limb badly set-it must be broken again in order to "be righted." Remains, vol. i. p. 433.

"the regiment not so proper for their republics, or "because they were ashamed to take away the "revenues, and preserve the order, or out of a blind

zeal, they have given an account to God: they "owe none to me. Should I condemn all these as "schismatics for want of Episcopacy, who want it "out of invincible necessity?

Thirdly, there are others who have neither the same desires, nor the same esteem of Episcopacy, "but condemn it as an Antichristian innovation, and "a rag of Popery. I conceive this to be most gross "schism materially. It is ten times more schisma"tical to desert, nay, to take away (so much as lies "in them) the whole order of Bishops, than to sub"tract obedience from one lawful Bishop. All that

can be said to mitigate this fault is, that they do it ignorantly, as they have been mistaught and mis"informed. And I hope that many of them are free "from obstinacy, and hold the truth implicitly in the preparation of their minds, being ready to receive "it when God shall reveal it to them. How far this may excuse (not the crime but) their persons from “formal schism, either à toto or à tanto, I determine "not, but leave them to stand or fall to their own "Master."

And again, in answer to the same charge whereto we are subjected, of having "a design to bring the Pope into England," in that they "unchurch either "all or most of the Protestant Churches, and maintain "the Roman Church and not their's to be true:"

"His assumption is wanting, which should be "this but a considerable party of Episcopal divines "in England do unchurch all or most of the Protes"tant Churches, and maintain the Roman Church to "be a true Church, and these to be no Churches. I can assent to neither of his propositions, nor to any part of them, as true, sub modo, as they are alleged by him.

"First, I cannot assent to his major proposition, "that all those who make an ordinary personal

uninterrupted succession of Pastors, to be of the integrity of a true Church, (which is the ground of "his exception,) have, therefore, an intention, or can justly be suspected thereupon to have any "intention, to introduce the Pope. The Eastern,

Southern, and Northern Churches are all of them "for such a personal succession, and yet all of them "utter enemies to the Pope. Secondly, I cannot "assent to his minor proposition, that either all or any considerable part of the Episcopal divines in

England, do unchurch either all or most part of the "Protestant Churches. No man is hurt but by him"self. They unchurch none at all, but leave them "to stand or fall to their own Master. They do not unchurch the Swedish, Danish, Bohemian, Churches, "and many other Churches in Polonia, Hungaria, "and those parts of the world, who have an ordinary uninterrupted succession of Pastors, some by the

1 Vindication of Grotius, disc. 3. quoted ib. p. 14 & 16.

« Anterior Continuar »

Libros

A Letter to the Right Rev. Father in God, Richard, Lord Bishop of Oxford, on ...