fanatic, seeing there is much fanaticism in the Tractarian system?cannot avoid, nor ought he to avoid, making his peculiar convictions bear upon every intellectual operation-upon the whole province of mind; and also upon the emotions of the heart and the kindlings of the imagination, with which poesy is chiefly conversant. It was not, therefore, inequitable to Mr. Williams, that, with his avowed opinions, the University of Oxford did not judge it wise, or safe, to place its sensitive youth under his influence in the capacity of Professor of Poetry.

Mr. Garbett's intrinsic pretensions to the chair were acknowledged on all sides to be highly respectable; and those who have a dislike to mystic versification, and prefer academical to monkish taste, considered that, even on this ground, apart from theological considerations, his judgment as an instructor was to be preferred to that of his competitor. But still, we admit that the contest was not affected merely by differences of poetical taste, but partook very much of the character of a struggle between opposing schools of divinity; and hence some hopes, some alarms, and much curiosity, were excited as to the course which the new Professor would pursue in his forthcoming Bampton Lectures.

But in justice to Mr. Garbett, it must be remembered that these lectures were not the result of the controversy respecting the Poetry professorship. All Oxford men are aware, that according to Canon Bampton's directions the lecturer is chosen (the electors are "the heads of colleges only") in the Easter term of the year preceding that in which they are delivered; and Mr. Garbett's learned, elaborate, and comprehensive volumes must have been the fruits of several years' study and reflection. They relate indeed chiefly to various important questions which have,

during the last ten years, convulsed the University of Oxford, and are now agitating our Church through all its ramifications; and the discussion of which, we think, comes fairly and strictly within the directions in Canon Bampton's will; but they were not hastily concocted, upon the close of a contested election, like an after-dinner speech, to gratify friends, and make opponents look small. We state this, because it would be unjust, not only to Mr. Garbett, but to the truths which he vindicates, to toss aside his book, as a party-spirited effusion, instead of carefully perusing and weighing it, with the serious calmness due to its arguments.

We say serious calmness; for it is not a light or popular book; it is too full of matter to be run over hastily; and being for the most part consecutive in its plan, we cannot casually dip here and there into it with much advantage. It must be mastered; and our conviction is, that when this justice is done to it, its contents will be found highly instructive, and its arguments for the most part sound and judicious; though in some points we are not sure that we understand the author's drift, nor do we in every case concur in his conclusions. We do not, for example, clearly comprehend what he considers to be the actual effects of infant baptism; nor can we reconcile what he attributes in some places to "the Church," with the definition of it which he himself quotes from the nineteenth Article. There is sometimes wanting that broadness of enunciation which is essential to convey truth in its fulness and force to the multitude, but of which academical auditors are apt to be impatient. Mr. Garbett indulges this feeling of his learned auditors, and in so doing perhaps follows the bent of his own mind. He represents most of his questions as having two sides; he

argues for and against each; he makes large concessions to his opponent; he carefully exhibits any supposed difficulties of his own theory; and then, with a sort of eclecticism, he arrives at his balanced conclusions; but the process sometimes so distracts the attention as to weaken the impression of the result. But he has this advantage, if not for popular effect, yet for candid deliberation, that he has worked his way calmly and philosophically, so that his opponents cannot object that they have been prejudiced, harshly used, or summarily convicted.

This

But

eclectic spirit appears in the remarks prefixed to his Lectures. Thus he says that Bishop M'Ilvaine and Mr. Faber "on Justification," and Mr. Goode " on the True Rule of Faith," exhibit the "most stringent proofs," and "leave nothing to desire." then "on the theory of the Church of Christ," he refers to Mr. Maurice as "the most philosophical writer of the day," and to the "noble things" in the writings of Mr. Sewell, and in those of the Tractarian divines. Now believing, as we do, that all that is peculiar in those writings relative to "the theory of the Church of Christ" is illusive; that this "theory" is not grounded upon Holy Scripture, the only "true "true rule of faith;" and moreover that, as its advocates justly argue, it is inseparably connected with those views respecting justification, tradition, and "sacramental religion," which Faber, M'Ilvaine, and Goode have refuted by "stringent proofs," we feel less certitude under the lecturer's guidance, than if he had not seemed to attempt to amalgamate things which are irreconcileable. We say seemed, for he does distinctly state that the Tractarian system and the Church of England system cannot be made to cohere; and that the latter is founded upon the inspired

word, the only true rule of faith. But we will give his own statements from his prefatory remarks.

"It is impossible for any candid observer to deny, that there is much in the actual condition of the Church of England to inspire the gravest apprehen

sions for the future. The form into lidate itself, when these agitations shall which her practical teaching may consohave passed away, and the relations to the commonwealth in which they may leave her, are alike uncertain. pose that the contest of opinions is over. There may now and then be a lull, but nothing can recall the elements of dissension which have been thrown into the midst of us, and which, for good or evil, are stirring men's souls to the bottom. They must run their coursethey must prevail, or be tempered, or be altogether subdued. The first would be ruinous, and the last is impossible. You cannot destroy living truths; and some such there are here, in the midst of dangerous errors. And though the wisdom of our rulers, with the blessing of God upon them, may prevent that disruption which has become anything but imagisanguine a hope. Meanwhile it is necesnary, no man can safely indulge too sary to look the danger in the face, and provide, if it be possible, the remedies best calculated to avert it. The task requires both moderation and firmness -not that moderation, however, which halts between two opinions, or hesitates to throw its whole weight on that side of the question which holds fast the distinctive principles of the reformed Church despises conciliation, broadens existing of England-nor that firmness which differences, and refuses to recognise great truths, because they are urged by adversaries.

"Without doubt it is an error to sup

ought to doubt the purity of purpose, and "One thing is certain-no candid mind the personal holiness, which are to be found on both sides in this great controversy; but it is equally certain, that, whether it be granted or not, it is irrelevant to the argument. No one questions the profound faith of Pascal, or the seraphic piety of Fenelon-but are we therefore to choose Pascal as the interpreter of the Gospel, or Fenelon as the

exemplar of the Christian life?

66

Reverencing, however, the piety of the leaders of this movement, as much as I admire their abilities, I do not agree with those who account it irreconcilable with honesty of principle, that they should by choice remain within the pale of the Church, from whose doctrinal type they have so widely departed.

Their avowed purpose, indeed, is one which men will admire or not, as they love or reject the Protestantism of our Church-but at all events, it is a grand one, the grandest of modern times-it is to restore the national Church to that Catholic Christianity and apostolic system, from which, in their opinion, it has fatally swerved-though it still retains elementary principles, by the expansion of which its Catholicity may be recovered. Clinging, therefore, as they do, with a profound affection, to this side of the Church's teaching-a side, the existence of which is unquestionable-till they are unconscious of any other; abhorring schism, and aiming at no less than the regeneration of the Church of England, and, through her, the spiritual reunion of the East and West,-no man has a right to trespass on their exercise of individual choice and feeling, when so much is at stake, and objects in their view so precious would be perilled by a change of position. If the Church herself, with a noble moderation, permits it, surely they are free to remain within

her.

"But, since it is unquestionable that this religious revolution is the object of their teaching and indefatigable exertions, it appears to me to be a great error to consider their theological opinions as other than a whole. We not only deceive ourselves and others, by regarding them in detached portions, but we do injustice to the able and learned men who have propounded them. No adequate conception can be formed of the masterly intellect which has consolidated them into one gigantic Church-system, if they be examined from the standing-point of the Church of England, instead of from that so-called Catholicism from which they themselves regard them. In the one case there are, on all sides, discrepancies and anomalies impossible to reconcile by any ingenuity with our existing system-in the other all is consistent, the work of a most luminous intellect, and every part coheres with every other, in a dependence alike of logical deduction and moral analogy.

"The professed character of this teaching is not the Christianity of the first and second centuries, as we find it recorded; but that of the fourth century, a period of demonstrable degeneracy, and hitherto accounted the precursor of the papal idolatries, but which is now assumed as the true epoch for the development of the Apostolic system. But even the theology of that period, corrupt as it is, is not contemplated on its own principles-in some points, such as the popu

lar use of Scripture, and the necessity of sacerdotal absolution, it is regarded CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 66.

with the eyes of Rome; and, not only are the preferences of the system in that direction, if opportunity should offer for their unobstructed exhibition, but its logical development is Tridentine Romanism.

"When a system, therefore, is offered to us so scientifically constructed, the only mode to grapple with it is to attack its first principles; for, while we avowedly or tacitly admit any of them, it is useless to complain of consequential abuses; and a real self-contradiction to reprobate errors, to which, though not yet established among us, the sagacious heads which framed, and the eager hearts that have embraced it, undeniably point as the necessary result. If we surrender the sole authority of Scripture as the canon of truth, and justification by faith only as the true exponent of the mode of salvation, all that makes the Church of England what she is, is lost; it may be a matter of time, or a matter of convenience of personal feeling, or a greater or less power of logical deduction,-but the argumentative defence of her reformed doctrine is rendered impossible -you are brought at once to the system of the fourth century, and, by inevitable progression, to the Christianity of Trent."

The incertitude to which we have adverted arises from the hypothesis that the Church of England has two sides of teaching; and that one of these alleged two sides is, or seems at first sight to be, favourable to the Tractarian system. We cannot discern these two sides; and indeed Mr. Garbett himself justly argues that Tractarianism must be regarded as a whole, "one gigantic Church-system;" the system, not of the Bible, or of the Anglican formularies, or even of the recorded Christianity of the first and second centuries; but of "the fourth century, a period of demonstrable degeneracy." He also affirms that "the sagacious heads which formed, and the eager hearts that have embraced," the Tractarian notions, well know whither their system tends; and he correctly adds, that if we once admit any other rule of faith than Holy Scripture, we must, "by inevitable progression," arrive at "the Christianity [why desecrate this word?] of Trent."

2 Z

Mr. Garbett does not, however, think that any considerable portion of the Tractarians will go over to Rome, for the very satisfactory reason that "If Rome be transferred into the midst of us, why should we trouble ourselves to go to Rome?" But he adds:

"The true danger to the Church lies in the gradual introduction of new elements into her teaching, which shall obliterate her distinctive and Protestant character -and the instant adoption of extreme doctrines of ecclesiastical power and privilege, indefensible on the principles of a scriptural Church, which must endanger her as a national establishment. A Laud, at this moment, would ruin us -and, in principle, we have many Lauds among us.

"And if the period should ever come that her ministry, as a body, should substitute the Church for Christ, tradition for Scripture, and justification by inherent holiness for justification by faith only, it would be a blow, from which, in these tempestuous times, she could not recover. The fact is, that there are certain modes of thought which are thoroughly incorporated with the mind of the English people-the unscriptural superstition of a religion of rites and ceremonies, whether you call it Romanism or ancient Christianity-the entire sufficiency of the Bible to teach all neces

sary truth-the competency of the laity to understand, for themselves, the Scriptures which God has given to all,-these and other kindred principles are irremovable we might as well attempt to roll back the ocean, as to oppose them."

:

Under these circumstances, Mr. Garbett's anticipations with regard to the prospects of the Church of England are as follow:

"So long as the Church of England,

therefore, shall combine her other cha

teristic truths with these as the basis of them, she will, with a zealous ministry, overcome opposition, and baffle or conciliate dissent; but if she throws these

master truths into the hands of noncon

formists, they will infallibly prevail.

The Church, in that case, would fall, to

make way for the temporary triumph of

Romanism, with which, on the dissolution of the Establishment, the new system would inevitably combine."

He admits indeed that "the abjuration of Protestantism, and the adoption in its stead of a Roman Catholic character," will "consoli

date a powerful party;" but the great body of the nation, he feels assured, will keep far aloof from such a movement. "The strong practical intelligence of the middle classes, the Gospel instinct of the lower, and the independent minds of all," he says will oppose it; and therefore the members of the Church of England must make a firm and consistent stand if they would not be crushed and annihilated between Rome and Geneva. Now we thoroughly agree in this conclusion; and we believe that with our Scriptural doctrine and our Apostolical constitution; with our Bible as our sole rule, and with our Prayer-book grounded on it; we can scripturally defend ourselves against the Papist and the Protestant Dissenter; but then comes the question among ourselves, What is the system of the Anglican Church? what is the teaching of our Prayer-book in regard to the special matters in discussion? And here, while we concur with Mr. Garbett in the drift of his remarks, we are persuaded that he has yielded to the Tractarians more than is warrantable, and, we fear, enough for the chief purposes of their system. We need not now go over this ground, having often trodden it in our remonstrances with those zealous opponents of Tractarianism, who practically prove its best friends, in affording it a vantage ground for its arguments, by admitting, and foisting upon the Church of England, its generative principles. We take our stand upon the dictum of Bishop Burnet, who only uttered of all sound Anglicans, that "the the opinion of the Reformers and doctrine of sacramental justification" is the most mischievous delulusion of Popery; and we do not see how Mr. Garbett can reconcile it with what he scripturally asserts of justification by faith. But we will, in justice to him, quote the whole of his statement.

"My own conviction upon the vital points of justification and the canon of faith, after the most attentive, and, as far as may be, dispassionate investigation, is this: that the evidence of her teaching, as generally received, is not only sufficient to cover those principles of the Reformation which are known by the name of Evangelical, but is perfectly irresistible to every candid mind-inexpugnable on any received principles of evidence and of argumentation. They stand out in front of all her system, as they do in the Gospel itself—marked, like the grandest works of nature, by a Divine and commanding simplicity. They are the regulating principles to which everything else must be subordinated by them, what is obscure must be cleared up, apparent anomalies reconciled, and our reverence for antiquity controlled.

"But then, if the Articles upon these points are to be successfully claimed as authority, we must be perfectly willing to receive the Prayer-book, thus limited by them, as the Church's practical teaching. We must be prepared ourselves to practise, and to inculcate upon our flocks, the duties of the Christian life, and our gradual growth in holiness under the ordained means of grace, as she has unfolded them to us in those Divine formularies.

"We must not only receive the eucharist, as a true participation of Christ, and the main sustentation of the spiritual life, but baptism, as, in a real sense, regeneration, even to infants. We must not allow ourselves, by that astuteness of reasoning which we refuse to admit in our opponents, to pervert her doctrine from its simple meaning, nor shrink from the decisive words in which she expresses it; we have no tenable ground, if we abandon here the doctrine of the Church universal.

"Whilst we do not condemn other Churches differently constituted from our own-whilst we do not confound circumstantials with essentials, and whilst we act and speak with the most cautious charity even in regard to those who have deliberately separated from her communion, we must accept and value the episcopal constitution of our own Church, as an ordinance of the Apostles, and a treasure Divinely secured to us and reverence that gift of the Holy Ghost, which follows the laying on of hands in them who rightly receive it.

"We must admit the desirableness of a godly discipline; and, though we are not bound down to the specific forms, or all the specific opinions, of the primitive ages on this important subject, yet we cannot refuse our assent to those general

principles upon which they acted, and which are clearly asserted by the Church of England.

"We must likewise accept the ministerial absolution, in its important uses in comforting the broken-hearted, and assuring the dying yet fearful saint, as a real and valuable power conferred by Christ himself.

"Finally-it is a vain effort, which will always recoil on those who make it, to shake off our relation to the past-to break the continuity of the Church Catholic, and to stand forth in mere individualities, without organic connexion, or a visible polity.

66

The witness of the primitive ages to the interpretation of Scripture, we must accept with the thankfulness due to it; and we must look with a kindly and respectful eye on that long line of illustrious saints who succeed them-rather regarding the Catholic faith which unites us, than the speculative opinions, or practical errors, which divide us; and giving more weight to things than to temporary modes of expressing them.

"We must be tolerant of variety of judgment, and not confound private opinion with Gospel-truth-nor look with contempt even on that extreme veneration for antiquity, which is the characteristic of many noble minds, the loss of which the Church would profoundly deplore.

"We must not be too ready to charge with formalism or hypocrisy that scheme of holy living, which though uncongenial to our own habits, and not imperative upon any Christian, has yet been reverentially esteemed and acted upon by saintly men in all ages.

"We must not too hastily conclude, that such practices of the Church as have fallen, we know not how, into desuetude, are therefore not grounded on permanent principles, or other than portions of a system whose full power cannot be tested, save by a consistent observance of the whole.

"If we are not prepared for this, we are not in a condition to defend the great doctrines of the Gospel, on the principles of the Church of England-we must inevitably fail in the attempt. They who swerve from the Church in one direction, though it be in points merely circumstantial, cannot prove to the world that their opponents have no right to swerve in another.

66

Finally.-It is our interest as well as duty to keep the formularies of the Church as they are-not to narrow into partial theories their scriptural breadth

not to limit that true Catholicity whereby she unites with truth, wherever it is to be found; and by virtue of which