The Church of England cleared from the charge of Schism

But to conclude. As our defence against the charge of Schism rests upon the witness of the ancient Church, thus fully corroborated by the Eastern Communion, so our whole safety lies in maintaining the clear indubitable doctrine of that Church. I have avoided the whole question of doctrine in these remarks, both as leading me into a wider field than that which I am obliged to traverse so cursorily at present, and as distinct from the question of Schism, though very closely connected with it. No one can deny that it is not sufficient for our safety to repel one single charge: but this charge was the most pressing, the most specious, and one which requires to be disposed of before the mind can with equanimity enter upon any other. My conclusion is, that upon the strictest Church principles, – in other words, upon those principles which all Christendom, in its undivided state, recognised for six hundred years, which may be seen in the Canons and Decrees of Ecumenical Councils, our present position is tenable at least till the convocation of a really Ecumenical Council. The Church of England has never rejected the communion of the Western, and still less that of the Eastern Church: neither has the Eastern Church pronounced against her. She has only exercised the right of being governed by her own Bishops and Metropolitans. There is, indeed, much peril of her being forced from this, her true position, – a peril lately pointed out by the author of "The real Danger of the Church of England." I need say little where he has said so much, in language so well-timed, so moderate, and from a position which cannot be misrepresented. I will only add, that I cannot conceive any course which would so thoroughly quench the awakened hopes of the Church's most faithful children, as that her rulers, which I am loth even to imagine, at a crisis like the present, should seek support, not in the rock of the ancient Church, in which Andrewes, Laud, and Ken, took refuge of old, – not in the unbroken tradition of the East and West, by which, if at all, the Church of Christ must be restored, – not in that great system which first subdued and then impregnated with fresh life the old Roman Empire, delaying a fall which nothing could avert, and which lastly built up out of these misshapen ruins all the Christian polities of Europe, – not in that time-honoured and universal fabric of doctrine to which our own Prayer-book bears witness, but in the wild, inconsistent, treacherous sympathies of a Protestantism, which the history of three hundred years in many various countries has proved to be dead to the heart's core. Farewell, indeed, to any true defence of the Church of England, any hope of her being built up once more to an Apostolical beauty and glory, of recovering her lost discipline and intercommunion with Christendom, if she is by any act of her rulers, or any decree of her own, to be mixed up with the followers of Luther, Calvin, or Zuingle: with those who have neither love, nor unity, nor dogmatic truth, nor sacraments, nor a visible Church among themselves: who, never consistent but in the depth of error, and the secret instinct of heresy, deny regeneration in Baptism, and the gift of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation and Orders, and the power of the keys in absolution, and the Lord's Body in the Eucharist. That is the way of death: who is so mad as to enter on it? When Protestantism lies throughout Europe and America a great disjointed mass, in all the putridity of dissolution,

"Monstrum horrendum, informe, ingens, cui lumen ademptum,"

judicially blinded, so that it cannot perceive Christ dwelling in his Church, while she grows to the measure of the stature of the perfect man, and making her members and ministers His organs – who would think of joining to it a living Church? Have we gone through so much experience in vain? Have we seen it develop into Socinianism at Geneva, and utter unbelief in Germany, and a host of sects in England and America, whose name is Legion, and who seem to be agreed in nothing else but in the denial of sacramental grace, and visible unity; and all this at the last hour, in the very turning point of our destiny, to seek alliance with those who have no other point of union but common resistance to the tabernacle of God among men? A persuasion that nothing short of the very existence of the Church of England is at stake, that one step into the wrong will fix her character and her prospects for ever, compels one to say that certain acts and tendencies of late have struck dismay into those who desire above all things to love and respect their spiritual mother. If the Jerusalem Bishopric, promoted, (at the instance of a foreign minister, not in communion with our Church,170 and who has recorded in the strongest terms his objection to her apostolical episcopacy,) by two Bishops on their private responsibility, without any authority from the Church of which they are indeed most honoured, but only individual rulers, be the commencement of a course of amalgamation with the Lutheran or Calvinistic heresy, who that values the authority of the ancient undivided Church, will not feel his allegiance to our own branch fearfully shaken? The time for silence is past. There is such a thing as "propter vitam vivendi perdere causas." It must be said publicly that such a course will lead infallibly to a schism, which will bury the Church of England in its ruins. If she is to become a mere lurking-place for omnigenous latitudinarianism; if first principles of the faith, such as baptismal regeneration, and priestly absolution, may be indifferently held or denied within her pale, – though, if not God's very truths, they are most fearful blasphemies, – the sooner she is swept away the better. There is no mean between her being "a wall daubed with untempered mortar," or the city of the living God. I speak as one who has every thing commonly valuable to man depending on this decision; moreover, as a Priest in that communion, whose constitution, violently suspended by an enemy for one hundred and thirty years, yet requires that every one of her acts, which bind her as a whole, should be assented to by her Priesthood in representation, as well as by her Episcopacy. If the grace of the sacraments may be publicly denied by ministers of the Church, nay, by a Bishop ex cathedrâ, with impunity, in direct violation of the most solemn forms to which they have sworn obedience, while the assertion of Christ's Real Presence in the Eucharist draws down censure on the most devoted head, the communion which endures such iniquity requires the constant uninterrupted intercession of her worthier children, that she be not finally forsaken of God, and perish at the first attack of antichrist.

1

Bellarmin. de Rom. Pont. Lib. iv. 25; iv. 24; i. 9.

2

De Maistre, du Pape. Liv. i. ch. i.

3

S. Cyprian de Unit. Ecc. 12.

4

"Development," &c. p. 22.

5

Thomassin, Part i. lib. i. ch. 4. De l'ancienne discipline de l'Eglise.

6

St. Cypr. de Unit. 4. Oxford Tr.

7

Quoted by Thomassin, ut sup.

8

Ibid.

9

S. Aug. Tom. v. 706, B.

10

S. Chrys. Tom. ii. 594, B.

11

St. Jerome, tom. ii. 279, Vallarsi.

12

Development, p. 279.

13

The words in italics are left out by Mr. N.

14

Thomassin, Part i. liv. i. ch. iii.

15

Of a passage in this letter, De Maistre says (Du Pape, liv. i. ch. 6): "Resuming the order of the most marked testimonies which present themselves to me on the general question, I find, first, St. Cyprian declare, in the middle of the third century, that heresies and schisms only existed in the Church because all eyes were not turned towards the Priest of God, towards the Pontiff who judges in the Church in the place of Jesus Christ." A pretty strong testimony, indeed, and one which would go far to convince me of the fact. Pity it is, that when one refers to the original, one finds that St. Cyprian is actually speaking of himself, and of the consequences of any where setting up in a see a schismatical Bishop against the true one. After this, who will trust De Maistre's facts without testing them? The truth is, he had taken the quotation at second hand, and never looked to see to whom it was applied. It suited the Pope so admirably that it must have been meant for him. But I recommend no one to change their faith upon the authority of quotations which they do not test.

16

Epist. 67. De Marciano Arelatensi.

17

S. Cyp. Ep. 29.

18

Ep. 73.

19

Ep. 74.

20

De Unit. Ecc. Oxf. Tr.

21

Op. St. Cypr. p. 329. ed. Baluz.

22

Tom. ix. p. 110.

23

S. Cyp. Ep. 75.

24

Liv. VII. sec. 32.

25

Tom. ix. 97. G.

26

Tom. ii. 96. F.

27

Tom. ii. 299. C.

28

Fleury, liv. vii. 23.

29

Ep. 68. S. Cypriani.

30

Liv. i. ch. 2, sect. 5.

31

Liv. i. ch. 3, sect. 8.

32

Fleury, Liv. xii. xxix. Conc. Sard. Can. 3, 4, 7.

33

Thomassin, Part I. liv. i. ch. 40. sect. 2.

34

Idem, ut supra.

35

St. Aug. Tom. V. 1097. B.

36

Tom. IV. 1215. E.

37

Tom. V. 240. F.

38

Tom. V. 1194. E.

39

Tom. V. 1195. E.

40

Tom. III. Part ii. 800. G.

41

He allows that Peter may be called the rock. Tom. i. 32, E.

42

Fleury 23, 30. Oxf. Tr.

43

St. Aug. Tom. II. 618. B.

44

St. Aug. Tom. ii. 635. F.

45

Tom. ii. 639. B.

46

Quoted by Fleury, 23, 32. Oxford Tr.

47

Fleury, Liv. 24, 35. Oxf. Tr. See the original: Codex Eccl. Afric. 138.

48

Chillingworth, quoted by Mr. Newman, "Developement," p. 4.

49

Tom. ix. 372. F.

50

Tom. ix. 340. A.

51

Tom. v. 1199. D. 1202. F.

52

Def. Cleri. Gall. Pars ii. lib. xii. ch. 5.

53

Def. Cleri. Gall. Pars ii. lib. xii. ch. 7.

54

Ibid. lib. xiii. ch. 19.

55

St. Chrys. Tom. ix. 757. A.

56

Lacordaire, Sur le Saint Siège.

57

St. Aug. Tom. x. 412. B. quoted in Fleury, Oxf. Tr. 3. 93.

58

Def. Clerc. Gall. Pars ii. lib. xii. c. 10.

59

Fleury, 25-47. Oxf. Trans.

60

Ut sup. ch. 14.

61

Du Pape, Liv. i. ch. 2.

62

Id. Liv. i. ch. 4.

63

Hammond's Translation.

64

Tillemont, tom. xv. p. 72.

65

Tillemont, tom. xv. p. 81.

66

Tillemont, tom. xv. p. 83.

67

Tillemont, tom. xv. p. 89.

68

St. Leo. Ep. 40.

69

St. Leo. Ep. 10. Edit. Ball.

70

Ib. Ep. 65.

71

Ep. 10.

72

St. Leo. Ep. 14, cap. i. xi.

73

S. Leon. Ep 6, cap. 2.

74

St. Jerome, Ep. 146. Vallarsi.

75

Theodoret, Ep. in Epist. S. Leonis, 52.

76

Mansi, 6, 817, quoted by Gieseler, tom. i. part ii. p. 192.

77

Isidorus, Hisp. Etymol. 7, 12, quoted by Gieseler, ut sup. p. 406.

78

Gieseler, tom. i. part ii. pp. 191, 192.

79

Gieseler, tom. i. part ii. p. 205.

80

Theodoret. Hist. Eccl. lib. v. ch. 9.

81

Observe this Council so called by the Greeks before it was received by the West.

82

It must be remembered that Diocese, in the language of this time, means the several provinces comprehended in a Patriarchate. It was the civil term.

83

S. Bas. M. Ep. 239.

84

Gieseler, tom. i. part ii. p. 202.

85

Sozomen, Hist. iii. ch. 8.

86

Ibid. Hist. iii. ch. 10.

87

Socrates, Hist. ii. ch. 17.

88

Bossuet, Sermon sur l'Unité de l'Eglise.

89

Bossuet, Def. Cleri Gall. Pars ii. lib. xii. ch, 15, 16, 17.

90

S. Leon. Ep. 120.

91

Ib. c. 4.

92

S. Leon. Ep. 102.

93

Ch. 18, ibid.

94

Fleury, Liv. xxviii. 29. Oxf. Tr.

95

Theod. lib. v. ch. 28, quoted by Tillemont.

96

Tillemont, tom. xv. p. 711.

97

The sittings are variously counted.

98

Fleury, liv. xxviii. xxx. Oxf. Tr.

99

Tillemont, tom. xv. p. 707.

100

S. Leon. Ep. 104, cap. 3.

101

S. Leon. Ep. 105.

102

Ep. 106, cap. 4.

103

Ep. 105, cap. 2.

104

Ep. 106, cap. 2-5.

105

Ep. 107.

106

Ep. 105, cap. 3.

107

Tillemont, tom. xv. p. 731.

108

S. Leon. Ep. 107.

109

S. Greg. Ep. lib. iii. 10.

110

On Development, p. 307.

111

Fleury, liv. xxxii. 54.

112

Gieseler, vol. i. part. ii. p. 192.

113

Nov. i. 1-7, quoted by Gieseler.

114

Fleury, liv. xxxiii. 4, 5, 6.

115

Nov. vi. Epilogus.

116

Nov. cxxiii. c. 3.

117

Ad Valerianum, Mansi, ix. 732.

118

Contra litt. Petiliani, ii. 51, all quoted by Gieseler.

119

Bossuet, Def. Cleri Gall. pars ii. lib. xii. cap. 19.

120

Fleury, liv. xxxiii. 52.

121

Bossuet, ut sup.

122

Du Pape, liv. i. ch. 3.

123

Fleury, Liv. xxxiii. 52.

124

Sozomen, lib. iii. ch. 11.

125

Tom. i. part ii. 410.

126

Def. Cleri Gall. pars ii. lib. xii. cap. 29.

127

Id. cap. 31.

128

Du Pape, liv. iii. ch. 7.

129

S. Greg. Ep. lib. ii. 52.

130

Lib. ix. 59, Gieseler.

131

Lib. xi. 37, Gieseler.

132

Gieseler, tom. i. part ii. 401.

133

Liv. xxxiv. 60.

134

Liv. xxxv. 19.

135

Ep. S. Greg. lib. v. 43.

136

Lib. ix. 68.

137

Lib. v. 19.

138

Lib. vii. 33.

139

Lib. v. Ep. 20.

140

Lib. vii. 27.

141

I cannot but consider St. Gregory's words to contain one of the most remarkable prophecies to be found in history; for this assuming the title and exercising the power of universal Pope has actually led not only to the concentration of all executive power in the Roman See, but to the conviction, among its warmest partisans, that the whole existence of the Church depends on the single See of Rome. Take the following from De Maistre: "Christianity rests entirely upon the Sovereign Pontiff." – "Without the Sovereign Pontiff the whole edifice of Christianity is undermined, and only waits, for a complete falling in, the development of certain circumstances which shall be put in their full light." – "What remains incontestable is, that if the Bishops, assembled without the Pope, may call themselves the Church, and claim any other power but that of certifying the person of the Pope in those infinitely rare moments when it might be doubtful, unity exists no longer, and the visible Church disappears." – "The Sovereign Pontiff is the necessary, only, and exclusive foundation of Christianity. To him belong the promises, with him disappears unity, that is, the Church." – "The supremacy of the Pope being the capital dogma without which Christianity cannot subsist, all the Churches, which reject this dogma, the importance of which they conceal from themselves, are agreed even without knowing it: all the rest is but accessory, and thence comes their affinity, of which they know not the cause." – Du Pape, Discours Préliminaire; Liv. i. ch. 13; Liv. iv. ch. 5. Could we have any stronger witness to the antagonism between the Papal and Patriarchal or Episcopal System? Or can any words be spoken more opposed in tone than these to the writings of Fathers and decrees of ancient Councils? Or are they who say such things wise defenders of the Church or promoters of unity?

142

Lib. viii. 30.

143

Part i. liv. i. ch. 11.

144

Mansi, vi. 1006. 1012, quoted by Gieseler.

145

Lib. v. 18.

146

Proph. Office, p. 221. Development, p. 10.

147

Sect. 13. March 28, 681, translated in Landon's Councils.

148

Bossuet, Def. Cler. Gall. pars ii. lib. xii. cap. 34.

149

Bellarmin de Pont. Rom. lib. iv. cap. 24, 25.

150

Bellarmin de Pont. Rom. lib. i. cap. 9.

151

Def. Cleri. Gall. pars ii. lib. xiii. cap. 11.

152

Bossuet is very moderate. St. Chrysostom says, (on Acts, Hom. 33,) "James was Bishop in Jerusalem, and so speaks last;" and presently, "There was no pride in the Church, but much good order. And see, after Peter, Paul speaketh, and no one rebukes him: James waits and starts not out of his place, for he was entrusted with the government." What would St. Chrysostom say to Bellarmine's doctrine?

153

Ep. S. Innoc.; in Op. S. Aug. tom. ii. 618; see above, p. 59.

154

Ibid, quoted above, p. 60.

155

St. Leo. Serm. in Anniver. Assumpt. quoted above.

156

Ep. 10.

157

Optat. l. ix. contra Parmen.

158

Greg. Nyss. T. 2. 746.

159

Cæsar. Arel. Epist. ad Symm.

160

Quoted above, p. 58.

161

Cap. xiv. lib. xiii. pars 2.

162

Bossuet, Def. &c. Pars ii. lib. xiii. cap. 20.

163

De Rom. Pont. lib. iv. cap. 26.

164

Developement, p. 28.

165

Du Pape, liv. ii. ch. 6; and Discourse Préliminaire.

166

See the account of his death in Bowden's Life.

167

Dante, Paradiso, xii. 55.

168

Bellarmine, quoted above.

169

I owe this observation to a friend who has had great opportunities of judging about the state of the Russian Church.

170

"Introduction to Die Zukunft Kirche. The work advocates the introduction of Episcopacy into the German Church, but not the Apostolical Episcopacy of the English Church, which M. Bunsen condemns in terms as strong as any which have been used by any opponent of the Bishopric. 'If ever and at any time the Episcopate, in the sense of Anglicanism, should be raised into a distinctive mark of Churchdom among us, not constitutionally and nationally (?) it would, in my opinion, be striking the death-blow to the innermost germ of life in the Church.' He will exert every energy, and shed the last drop of his blood in order to preserve the Church of the German nation against such an Episcopacy," —English Churchman, April 30, 1846. There are solemn words, which have found an echo in many hearts, "May that measure utterly fail, and come to nought, and be as though it had never been!"