sense, and accordingly always and in all places received by Christians; and as for the defence of the Reformation, we are content to undertake it without the aid of the principle which later ages have attempted to create for it. The principle of reverence for catholic tradition, as maintained by the church of England, was a principle calculated not merely for the maintenance of Christian truths always received, but it was essentially a corrective and reforming principle; for it taught the church to look beyond the limits of existing practices and opinions into the mind of all ages, and to take the belief of the universal church in most holy union with Scripture, as the rule by which she might be enabled to give due importance to matters essential, and to correct abuses and innovations inconsistent with the apostolic truth. And it was a principle fraught with practical wisdom, because it placed before her the experience and examples of fifteen hundred years, to guide and admonish her in her proceedings. There may be one other answer made to this:-that the church of England herself did not understand the true principles of the Reformation; that we must look for those principles amongst the Lutherans or Calvinists. But I have already shown that they also were abundant in their acknowledgments of the authority of the catholic church, and of general and national synods in matters of faith; that they shrank from the imputation of setting up their private opinions against the authority of the catholic church; that they never designed or wished to separate themselves from the existing Roman churches; that the Reformation in itself was, in a great degree, brought about without a previous design on their parts; that they were ready to alter their systems much, if the Roman church would have made some concessions and re-admitted them to her communion". There are facts enough to prove all this, and to show that our churches do not stand alone in recognizing the authority of catholic tradition. Therefore there is error in both the assertions on which Blackburn founds his attack upon the Articles of the church of England; viz. that "the protestants withdrew from the communion of the church of Rome," and that the principle on which they did so, was the right of an unbounded liberty (so called) of private judgment, and the rejection of all church authority. Indeed Blackburn himself is compelled, by the force of truth, to acknowledge that the reformers themselves afterwards "took their interpretations of Scripture," and "formed their rule of faith and doctrine" on "the sense of the orthodox fathers;" that "in those days nothing was thought to be sufficiently confirmed by Scripture testimonies, without additional vouchers from the ancient worthies of the church;" that "in process of time some particular persons began to see into this mistake," and Cartwright (the Puritan) " in his dispute with Archbishop Whitgift, about the year 1573, took the courage to appeal from the authority of the fathers;" that his sentiments were regarded 66 as so much blasphemy;" that when Erasmus Johannes, a schoolmaster at Antwerp, a few years afterwards assailed the fathers and councils, "the times were not ripe for the toleration of these sentiments," and he was obliged to fly his country!" These facts, admitted as they are by a despiser and an enemy of catholic tra 66 Part I. Chapter XII. i Blackburn's Confessional, p. 1, 2. § Ibid. p. 3. * P. 20. dition, are of the highest value: they show what the general sentiment of the Reformation was, and they render it utterly incredible that it could have been originally founded in the contradictory principle; because if it had been so, how could all have concurred immediately afterwards in adopting the principle of obedience to the doctrine of the catholic church? CHAPTER VII. ON THE VARIATIONS OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH. THE regulations made by our catholic apostolical churches concerning doctrine and discipline during the sixteenth century, have been maliciously traduced by our opponents, as affording evidence of heretical variations and inconsistencies. The mere circumstance of a church's altering her doctrine or discipline in some point, affords no presumption of heresy. The African churches, in the time of Cyprian, maintained the invalidity of heretical baptism: in the time of Augustine they decreed the contrary. The Western churches practised communion in both kinds till the thirteenth century: the Synod of Constance confirmed the opposite practice. The Western churches, in the ninth century, condemned the worship of images: yet afterwards many of them permitted the custom. For a long time they acknowledged the Roman pontiffs to have temporal authority over princes: yet this doctrine was afterwards rejected by the Gallican and other churches. The churches of Spain hold the immaculate conception of the Virgin as a matter of faith: yet it will hardly be contended, that they might not maintain the contrary doctrine. In France the superiority of a general synod to a pope was held de fide, yet it is so no longer. The variation then, so justly assigned as a note of heresy by Tertullian, Hilary, and other fathers, does not relate to the mere correction of prevalent errors and abuses by competent authority; but to the fluctuation, contradictions, and uncertainty of sects who separate from the church. Variation in this sense, or as implying inconsistency, or sanction of what is admitted to be heresy or dangerous error, affords a legitimate presumption of unsoundness. But of such variations there is no evidence in the Reformation of the church of England, which proceeded gradually, consistently, and lawfully, in the correction of modern, though prevalent errors and abuses. I. The Reformation of the church of England, during the reign of Henry VIII. is represented uniformly by Bossuet, and our other opponents of all "denominations," as limited entirely to the rejection of the Papal supremacy". With this single exception, according to them, the system previously existing was received and authorized in all points. Now it will appear on examination, that the corrections in the reign of Henry, were very little inferior in importance to those made in Edward's reign. Besides the rejection of the papal supremacy of jurisdiction in the convocation of 1534, the doctrine of purgatory was disclaimed by authority of the church in 1537 and 1543 (she being well aware that the с a Bossuet, Variations, liv. vii. sect. 24-28.37. iii. b Burnet, Hist. Ref. vol. i. and Institut. of a Christian Man, Formularies of Faith, p. 211. Necessary Doctrine and Erudition, ibid. p. 376. |