baptised as "clothed in purple garments dyed in the Lord's blood." ."* Jerome describes Christ as saying to all Christians, "Ye are baptised in my blood." Augustine represents the faithful" as participating in our Lord's flesh and blood in baptism."

""

66

A sort of transubstantiation is also described as taking place in men themselves at Baptism. am changed," says Gregory," into Christ in Baptism."§ "The faithful," says Bede, " are transformed into our Lord's members, and become his body." Man, in Baptism," says Leo, "is made the body of Christ." Now this sort of language, which abounds throughout the writings of the fathers, should render us cautious how we catch at their exaggerated phrases, and turn them into theological dogmas. Happily, however, in the present case, we have not only reflex and inferential evidence, but the most express declarations, in their own writings, that in calling the consecrated elements "the body and blood of Christ," they meant nothing approaching to transubstantiation. Augustine

says,

"Christ delivered to his disciples the figure of his body and blood." (Enarrat. in Psal. iii.) He adds, that "he who does not abide in Christ, and in whom Christ does not abide, undoubtedly neither eats his flesh nor drinks his blood." (In Joh. Ev. c. vi. Tract xxvi.) Chrysostom asks, "If Jesus did not die, of what are the things which we perform, the symbols?" (Serm. on. Matt.) He also says, that the sacramentis esteemed worthy to be called the Lord's body, although the nature of the bread remaineth in it." Origen asks, 66 If Christ had neither flesh, or blood, as some heretics affirm, of what body and

*Chrysost. 2, 226, ad illumin. Cate. 1.
Jerom 3, 16. in Isai. i.
August. Tract 11.
§ Gregory. Orat. 40.

what blood are the bread and cup which he delivered the images? By these symbols he commended his memory to his disciples." (Dial. iii. cont. Marcion.) Clemens Alexandrinus says, "Such food" (for faith) our Lord elsewhere sets forth in the Gospel of John by symbols, saying, Eat my flesh, and drink my blood." (Pod. c. 6. 1. 1. p. 100.) Cyril of Jerusalem says, In the type of the bread is given to you the body, and in the type of the wine, the blood." (Cat. Myst. iv. 1, p. 292.) Eusebius of Cesarea says, "Christ appointed them to use bread as a symbol of his own body." (Dem. Evan. lib. 8, c. 1.) Tertullian speaks of " the bread by which Christ represents his body." (Adv. Marcion. lib. 1. p. 372.) Ambrose says, "You receive the sacrament as a similitude; it is the figure of the body and blood of the Lord. You drink the likeness of his precious blood." (De Sacram. lib. 4. c. 4.) Cyprian says, "The blood of Christ is shewn by the wine." (Cecil. patri. epis. 65. p. 153.) and Pope Gelasius (A.D. 492) plainly declares, that the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceases not to exist, and assuredly the image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in these mysteries. (Contra Eutychen.)

Here are ten of the leading fathers of the church, and if time permitted I might refer to forty more, who all explicitly tell us, that in calling the sacramental elements, the body and blood of Christ, they mean no more than they apprehend Christ himself to have meant-namely, that the bread and wine were the types, the symbols, the figures, the representations, of his body and blood; but that they continued to be bread and wine still. And so much for boasted evidence from anyour tiquity, in favour of TRANSUB

STANTIATION.

THE times in which we live are certainly marked by many striking and peculiar features, one of which unquestionably is a very eminent degree of activity. Our railroads and our steam engines are almost annihilating time and space; bodies of every description are in rapid motion; and the march of mind is the subject of many forebodings on the one hand, and of lively anticipations on the other : in neither of which however do we participate to any thing like the extent of many around. We are not indeed the subjects of any desponding apprehensions. That our church and state will be tried, that our enemies are malignant and determined, that many of our friends are ignorant, supine, mistaken or lukewarm, are all sufficiently obvious; but it is equally certain that the cause of truth and righteousness shall prevail, nor can we see either in the language of prophecy or in the progress of events, any reason to apprehend that Popery shall ever again in these realms resume the ascendant.

We are well aware that widely different views are entertained by many whom we highly esteem. That the existence of a popish and infidel party in the House of Commons; the increase of popish chapels throughout the land; and the out-breaking of semi-popish principles at Oxford and elsewhere, depress the minds of many Protestants, and occasion Romanists to rejoice and triumph; but these various circumstances contribute most powerfully to elicit other feelings and excite counter-exertions, so that at the very moment when the ungodly triumph, their downfall becomes most inevitable. To enter fully into particulars, would occupy more time and space than we can at present devote to the discussion; but we refer with confidence and congratulation to the long list of publications prefixed to this article, all of which

have very recently accumulated on our table, and clearly show that the friends and supporters of our Church are active and energetic in meeting every exigency; so that no sooner does any assailant appear, than able and efficient combatants are found fully armed and equipped for the field.

We are not indeed clear whether the so called Oxford Tracts have not produced a deeper impression than their intrinsic merits deserve, or than the danger which they threaten can justify. That they abound in heresy, and are deeply tainted with Popery is to us most obvious; but at the same time we rather rejoice that the symptoms are now becoming clear and unquestionable. Pharisaism is as destructive to the soul as Popery ; but the evils and dangers of Pharisaism are less alarming and revolting; it is therefore rather an advantage to the general cause when men speak out. The Froudes and Puseys and Newmans are only more fully developed plants of the germs apparent in the remembrancers, the orthodox, and anti-evangelicals of former days: they may and will seduce a few, and mislead a few; but they will demonstrate to many the real tendency of certain plausible principles; will lead to the examination of the foundation of those principles, and will thus eventually call men off from human authority, to simplicity and dependance on the word of God. The Puseyite, Newmanian and Froudian principles may prevail to a certain extent amongst theorists and speculators, but they will not find much acceptance among practical men. They are suited to a collegiate and conventual atmosphere, but they will never survive the buffettings of the real business and storms of life. Those clergymen by whom these principles are conscientiously held, will find when they come to labour in parishes, that their exer

tions are utterly in vain; that nothing but the preaching of the cross is effectual to the production of any extensive moral change, and they will therefore either retire from the field in despair, or adopt a more scriptural, a more evangelical mode of preaching. We cannot but hope that the Oxford Tracts will be followed by somewhat of a reaction which may issue in a revival of religion in that university, and in the production of a more efficient ministry than that which a few years since occupied her churches; that thus out of the eater may come forth meat.

The

Meanwhile it is well that enquirers should be directed where they may look for a clear statement, and a satisfactory refutation of those heretical principles which the Tracts for the Times contain; and the more so as these principles are promulgated by men of enlarged benevolence, amiable disposition, and exemplary character. great enemy has in every age made use of some who appear to a considerable degree exempt from human frailty, that he may the more effectually sow tares among the wheat. It is impossible, say many, that so good a man can be materially wrong: forgetting that "Satan "is on some occasions "transformed into an angel of light!"

Among the able works at the head of this article, the charge of the venerable the Archdeacon of Ely is especially deserving of attention. All Archdeacon Browne's Charges are distinguished by sound sense, clear judgment, and powerful argument, and they are invariably accompanied by a mass of important quotations from standard authors strikingly illustrative of the point in hand. Few writers display such extensive reading and such unwearied industry. You may not at all times coincide with the author's views, but you must always feel that he is not only in

NOVEMBER 1838.

variably right on all essential points, but that he makes out a strong case in favour of those positions from which at the first you might feel disposed to dissent.

In the commencement of his charge the venerable Archdeacon states that thoroughly to sift the dogmas proposed by what may well be designated the Laudian School of Theologians, would far exceed the limits to which he was necessarily confined, and that he would therefore only animadvert upon some of the leading features of the system, developed in the Tracts for the Times. That system is essentially leaning towards Popery, as is clearly evinced by the terms applied to the apostate Church of Rome,-by the general spirit and train of argument which pervade the 71st tract written expressly on the controversy with the Romanists -by the language used on the Lord's Supper, the invocation of saints, the rule of faith, as being Scripture and tradition taken together, the assertion that the Sacraments, not preaching, are the sources of divine grace,-the views promulgated on regeneration, sanctification, sin after baptism, &c. On all these points clear and explicit statements are introduced, the sentiments of the tracts are evinced by appropriate quotations, and exposed by appeals to Holy Writ and the authorized formularies of our Church; and the arguments contained in the charge itself, are expanded, illustrated, and enforced, by a series of able quotations and disquisitions in the appendix. It is of course impossible to convey any adequate view of the valuable matter contained in the present seasonable publication; and we must therefore content ourselves with strongly recommending the perusal of the work itself more especially to our clerical readers.

Mr. Maurice's Key to the Popery of Oxford, contains a series

3 K

of important extracts from the remains of the Rev. Richard Hurrel Frowde, late Fellow and Tutor of Oriel College, which shew how very far he and his friends Messrs. Keble and Newman have departed from scriptural Christianity, and afford strong reason to conclude that had Mr. Frowde lived a little longer, he would have found it necessary to recede from the English church. These extracts throw much light also on the crafty plan of agitation devised and adopted by the writers of the Oxford Tracts, and excite some suspicion that these writers have been under similar tuition with the Irish agitator. The extracts are arranged under suitable heads, and will be found exceedingly useful for those who wish to become acquainted with the grand outlines of the modern heresies; though we regret that we cannot commend the reasonings of Mr. Maurice as our respect for his piety and industry lead us to desire. We cannot but wish that his disquisitions on the Oxford armorial bearings, &c. had been omitted, or at least very considerably modified.

The statement, however, of the modern heresies most adapted for popular use, will be found in the recently published edition

of Essays on the Church, a work every way deserving of extensive circulation. The following extract will, we think, support our assertion. The author is especially animadverting on the defence of the Oxonians inserted in the Quarterly Review.

Now this defence evidently rests mainly upon two points. 1. That the parties accused are men of pious and exemplary lives-and 2. That the notions they desire to propagate are no novelties, but are nothing more than a return to ancient and acknowledged truths.

Are these two pleas of any real value? We think not. For

1. It is always Satan's plan, if he would introduce any error or heresy into the church, to use the agency, not of vile or

worthless characters, but of those of established reputation for piety and sanctity. There was nothing revolting in the personal demeanour of Arius, or Pelagius, or Arminius, on the contrary there was in each something attractive and captivating. In the Romish Church also, we find that those whose ambitious schemes have been most fatal to the peace of the world, have been at the same time men of high pretensions for sanctity and selfdenial. Such was Hildebrand, and St. Francis, and Thomas a Becket, and Dunstan. We cannot therefore for a moment admit that the personal purity, or the learning, or the ascetic piety of the edi

tors of the Oxford Tracts, has the least bearing on the question of their real value or demerit. Nor can we imagine that these individuals would themselves wish to rest their case on any such plea. They would probably be the last persons to assert, that the purity of a teacher's life was to be the warrant and guarantee for his doctrine. The deep and fervent piety, the self-denying and laborious zeal, and holy enthusiasm of such men as Wesley and Irving, are sufficiently known; yet we do not consider their personal excellences to constitute any ground for our adopting the excursive system of the one, or the heresies of the other. But

2. It is pleaded that the object of the publications in question, is 'not to vent any new opinions, or to form a new school of theology; but to recal the minds, especially of the clergy, to the old standard divinity of their church.' To this it may be replied, that there is little merit in not having tried to do that which is hardly possible to be done; that the man who, at this time of day, could 'vent any really 'new opinions,' would deserve the reward offered many centuries since, to him who would invent a new pleasure;that there is no absurdity, or heresy, or dangerous speculation, or superstitious folly, which may not be found in abundance in that repository of the changing notions of a thousand years which is dignified with the general appellation of 'antiquity? or the fathers;'-and that, in short, the mere desire, the expressed wish, to carry men's minds back into all this mass of error, superstition and popery, is of itself a sufficient condemnation of the whole scheme.

A wholesale and senseless exclusion of antiquity would be as unjustifiable, as a wholesale and irrational admiration for it. But there is no difficulty in exercising discrimination in this matter. There are periods of comparative purity in the his. tory of the church, both ancient and modern. If the Oxford tract writers really intended only to recal our attention to these, their object would be most commendable. But let us not be deceived.