Thus, some would desire that the instruction given in our schools should not embrace the Scriptures or the subject of religion at all, but should leave this to be taught by parents at home, or by the ministers of religion on the Lord's day. Thus, they say, all could be jointly instructed in that secular knowledge about which all agree: all could be trained together in those moral duties which men of every different creed admit; while the parents in each case would be left to provide for the religious instruction of their children, and for training them up in such system of religious truth as they themselves receive.

But when we consider what this proposal practically is, we find, that, under the operation of such a system, religious instruction, thus excluded from the school, would but too generally be consigned altogether to neglect; the parents of children in the lower orders of society being not only commonly incapable of conducting the religious education of their children, but frequently uninterested about it. Who, indeed, that is practically acquainted with the condition of the lower population either of our manufacturing or agricultural districts, could for a moment suppose that that could be a satisfactory system of education, which, in its most important point, was left in their hands? Is not the uneducated state of our population the very evil for which we are seeking a remedy? and how then can they, who are uneducated themselves, educate others? How can they, who have not themselves been trained in christian truth, train their children therein? How can they be expected to provide for the due instruction of their offspring in religion, who have not learnt to value its blessings for themselves? In this system, therefore, the one thing needful would in fact be very generally neglected; and would also, in theory, be made of little account, when it appeared as if the rest of education could be carried on without it; and also another false principle would be established, viz. that morals can be separated from religion, and from those Scriptures from whence we learn alike the will of God and the duty of man.

In short, when we prove this scheme of education, we find it one which we may not adopt and maintain. The Church cannot undertake to teach moral duties, without reference to the divine law. She cannot sanction any system of national education which excludes the word of God; because she holds that christian morals are founded on christian faith, of which faith the Scriptures are the sole and sufficient rule to which all teaching must refer.

But it is less necessary to dwell on this head, because the plan of education spoken of above is one which finds but few advocates, the general opinion of the country imperatively requiring that religion in some form or other should be made the basis of the education of the people.

Another, and a far more specious proposition, would admit the letter of the Bible, as being that which all who call themselves Christians agree to receive; but would exclude all formularies of faith and systems of instruction in the doctrines of Christianity, confining the religious teaching to the bare letter and grammatical sense of the words of Scripture, and not allowing any deduction to be drawn from them whereby offence could be given to the opinions or feelings of the members of the most conflicting sects. This is a system which meets with many supporters, which is carried on by a large and influential Society, and which the Church is urged to receive in lieu of that instruction by which she has hitherto imparted to her children the knowledge of christian truth.

But when we prove this scheme, specious as it is, we find, in the first place, that if carried out to its legitimate consequences, it must exclude the whole body of revealed truth, and leave nothing of Christianity but the name, inasmuch as there is no doctrine which is not the subject of objection to one or other sect, and each, if the principle be once admitted, may as fairly require its scruples to be respected, as others theirs. If the Baptist may claim that the sacrament of regeneration be not named to those whom he deems no fit recipients of it, the Quaker may equally require that both the sacraments be altogether omitted,

Evidence of H. Dunn, Esq. secretary to the Britsih and Foreign Society, pp. 59,60.

as neither of them is received by him. If the Independent or Presbyterian is to succeed in causing to be suppressed what may be deemed the less important doctrines about which they differ from the Church, the Socinian has an equal right to demand that out of respect for his conscience the doctrines which are at the foundation of Christianity itself the atonement of the Divine Saviour, and the sanctifying agency of the Holy Spirit-be banished from our schools.

But the Church deems not so. Her commission is not only to teach the truth, but the whole truth. She may not suppress any, the least tittle, of the counsels of God, in tenderness to the errors of men. She cannot sanction, even in any degree, a principle which involves such consequences as these-a principle, which in its natural results would strip the gospel of all its peculiarities and all its power, and substitute the cold abstractions of philosophic morals for the living principles of faith and love.

But it is argued that such consequences as these will not follow, because the reading of the letter of the Scripture is sufficient to guide the mind to a knowledge of Scripture truth. The essential doctrines of Christianity, it is said, are so plainly written as not to be mistaken or overlooked; and if, therefore, the Bible itself be read in our schools, there is no reason to apprehend that the scholars will fail to obtain from it a sound and sufficient knowledge of the doctrines of Christianity. But if this be so, whence is it that there are so many heresies and perversions of the truth among those who equally profess to receive the Bible as their guide? Is it not the case that every heretic in every age has received the Scriptures, and appealed to them, however wrongfully, in support of his errors or misbelief? Or if men be thus liable to go astray in the interpretation of the word of God, are children indeed competent to interpret that word to themselves? Are they sure to collect for themselves, from the bare letter of Scripture, a correct system of religious truth, and a sound code of moral law?

The Church, my brethren, has never sanctioned such a view as this. She has ever held, that to omit to convey to her children the truths she knows, and to leave them to derive them themselves by their unassisted reason from the word of God, would be to abandon her office as a faithful witness and keeper of the truth, would be to launch those committed to her care into an ocean of uncertainty and doubt, a sea without a shore, and with no pilot to steer the ship,-would be to sanction a system in which Ignorance would be its own guide, Presumption its own instructor, and Error its own judge: and that would be truth which each man's rash opinion devised for himself; and every man would, without blame, believe--and why, therefore, should he not also do?— that which is right in his own eyes.

The Church, while she upholds in its full force the plenary authority of Holy Writ, as the rule of faith, does not deem that children are capable of unfolding. that volume for themselves, and of drawing from it, by their unassisted abilities, correct views of religious truth. She holds it to be her duty to train up her children, not to leave them to train up themselves; to teach them, not to leave them to teach themselves; to commit to them those truths which she has received, not to commit it to chance; whether they discover those truths or not. She, therefore, as I have said, framed, for this end, her Creeds in the days of primitive purity, her Articles and her Catechism, when she freed herself from the dominion of Rome, as standards of sound orthodox faith, and guides to train up her children in the same. And these things, by God's blessing, we will maintain.-Pp. 10-17, 8vo. edit.; pp. 10-16, small edit.

We cannot take leave of this sermon, without expressing our gratitude to the Bishop for having published it in such a form as to enable it to be placed, at a most trifling cost, in the hands of every member of the Church who can read it; a result, we conceive, much to be desired.

Evidence of H. Dunn, Esq. p. 60.

ART. III.--Ancient Christianity, and the Doctrines of the Oxford Tracts. By the author of Spiritual Despotism. London: Jackson and Walford. Dublin. W. Curry, Jun. and Co. 1839.

We hope to stand excused in the judgment of our readers if we should be found to advert once and again to the controversy, which has been recently set agoing by the writers of the Tracts for the Times. That the circumstance of long-neglected topics being mooted afresh by men of such profound erudition should attract universal attention, is just what might have been anticipated; nor can it be denied, that the subjects which they have undertaken to treat of are, many of them, most intimately associated with the very nature and constitution of the Holy Catholic Church. This fact alone would, of itself, be sufficient to raise up a host of clamorous assailants, who would of course be the more noisy in proportion to their shallowness, and the more crafty the less sincere in their attacks. But it does not therefore follow, that the views entertained and promulgated by the accomplished divines of Oxford should meet with general acceptance, even amongst the wise and the true-hearted. There is something (we will not say as much) of peculiarity as of apostolic teaching in the system which they are so strenuously advocating. And it may admit of a question, even in the minds of those who really love the Church, whether certain points connected with her outward administration have not been thrust too prominently forward, and invested with an air of importance that could scarcely fail of exciting the ridicule of the profane, and making the cautious hesitate and stand aloof. Again, it is not very probable that the majority of churchmen will consent to tie themselves down to any factitious mode of interpreting the Scriptures, which these ripe scholars may see fit to prescribe, either at their own pleasure, or on the authority of the ancient fathers. For ourselves, we should be content to rest the pretensions of our Church upon the broad and well-defined basis of those catholic principles which are so distinctly enunciated in the writings of our venerable Reformers. And whilst we receive and acknowledge with heartfelt gratitude the boon conferred upon Christendom by these uncompromising defenders of the faith, we would rather gaze with reverential awe upon the goodly superstructure which these holy hands have reared, than assay to mend or meddle with a building, so fitly framed together," and exhibiting on every side such just and beautiful proportions. There is no saying to what extent of unhingement, or if we may be allowed the expression, of moral dilapidation, the sacred edifice may be exposed, if but the tiniest stone be loosened or shifted from its appointed place.

In the Letter of Dr. Pusey which we were compelled to allude to so

66

cursorily in our last number, we abstained from offering any comment upon the chapter devoted to the doctrine of celibacy, because the subject in general is at present undergoing a very clear and rigid examination by the author of Spiritual Despotism. Turning, however, to the letter in question, we perceive that there are certain commendations lavished upon the "lonely course "of the unmarried servants of the Lord, in which few perhaps will be inclined to sympathize, and still fewer desire to share. Celibacy is extolled as the more excellent way," as a "higher way," whilst the "sanctified virgin estate" is lauded as a holier condition than that of matrimony. Further on there is a sentiment broached, which, if not directly mischievous in its tendency, will at least appear to less ardent minds to savour somewhat of the enthusiastic. It is this:-" If the degraded population of many of our great towns are to be recovered from the state of heathenism in which they are sunk, it must be by such preaching of the cross, wherein it shall be forced upon man's dull senses, that they who preach it have forsaken all to take it up and bear it after their Lord."

And here let it be borne in mind, that the superior efficacy of the unmarried pastor's ministrations is not attributed to freedom from the domestic anxieties which the wedded life invariably brings along with it, but is made to flow entirely out of that visible sanctity, which the sterner grace of self-denial" has thrown around the person of him "who can find no rest in the ordinary and even paths of life." We shall not have space to follow the learned writer, whose work we have announced at the head of the present article, through more than the first of the three numbers which have already appeared; but we cannot refrain from extracting a passage towards the conclusion of the last, which very appositely exposes this high-wrought notion of spiritual preeminence.

So long as religious celibacy rests upon the plain ground of utility, it will keep within narrow bounds, and the practice may be exempt from peril; but the moment it is propounded as an object of spiritual ambition, or as a lofty distinction, many motives, and some of them of a very impure kind, will come into play, impelling multitudes to snatch this glory, who have sadly mistaken their personal call. Only one course of events can then follow; namely, the prevalence of frightful abuses. If religious celibacy be a glory and a beauty, in itself, the clergy must not leave this advantage to the laity. This were as if the brightest military courage, the freshest laurels of war, neglected by the officers, in an army, were left to be the distinction of the privates. Then if some of the clergy arrogate this professional virtue, all must at length pretend to it.

But we must go back, and will therefore proceed at once to the subjectmatter and design of the work itself. In the Dedicatory Letter, the writer expresses his full concurrence in "the mode of repelling the pretensions of the Romish church, recommended by the writers of the

Oxford Tracts;" as being "in substance, an appeal from the alleged authority of that church, to a catholicity more catholic, and to an antiquity more ancient." But the point of disagreement between our author and these divines is, "as to the extent and conditions of the deference that is due to the practices and opinions of the early church.” Having then stated his own qualifications for forming a competent decision on this preliminary subject, he goes on to show that a peculiar disadvantage attaches to each of the accredited religious parties among us, to whom it is natural to look as the opponents of the Oxford divines. These parties are severally designated as those "staunch and well contented Church-of-England men, who are accustomed to admire the fathers on no account more than that of their wisdom in carrying amendment just to the point where it actually stopped, and no further; "the political adherents and champions of the establishment" — "that estimable portion of the clergy-call them not a party, which has conventionally (and we add somewhat invidiously) been designated evangelical;" and to close the list of the inefficients, the whole body of dissenters. We shall not wait to offer any remark on the assumed obstacles which are thrown, rather gratuitously, in the way of the first of these classes, but allow the writer to state, in his own lucid and straightforward lauguage, the position he has taken up for himself in the present important discussion.

The writers of the Tracts for the Times, have not as yet effected the indispensable preliminary work of defining the legitimate authority of the ancient church, and setting it clear of the many perplexities that attach to the work. Until this be done, they, in asserting this authority, and others in impugning it, are beating the air. In the following pages an endeavour will be made, and will be repeated from different starting points, so to exhibit the real religious condition, and moral and spiritual characteristics of the ancient church, as may go far in aiding us to draw the line between a due, and an undue deference to this alleged authority.

What we have to inquire about is the actual condition of the christian church from the apostolic times, and downwards, toward the seventh century. We regret exceedingly, that our limits compel us to pass over many excellent and pertinent remonstrances against the application" of any comprehensive terms, either of admiration or contempt, to a body and series of writers, stretching through seven hundred or a thousand years;" but the following extracts suffice to show how far the author appreciates the benefits which the singular providence of God has secured for later times, in the preservation of the various memorials of the early and intervening ages:

:

It must be admitted, that all things are now amply and indubitably laid down in the apostolic writings; and in a few instances this indeterminateness, or inconclusiveness of the canonical books, affects particulars in which we fain must make a practical choice, and must adopt either one course or its opposite.