Has the Church or the State the power to educate the Nation? A Course of Lectures. By Frederick Denison Maurice, M.A., Chaplain to Guy's Hospital. Ward's Library of Standard Divinity: consisting of Treatises by the Rev. Stephen Charnock, Dr. Bellamy, Robert Hall, Cardinal Bellarmine's Notes of the Church examined and con- futed by Dr. Sherlock, Dr. Freeman, Bishop Patrick, Bishop Williams, Bishop Fowler, Dr. Thorpe, Dr. Payne, Dr. Clag- The History of Greece. By Thomas Keightley, Author of the Mythology of Greece and Italy, History of England, History of Rome, Outlines of History, &c., &c. Authenticated Report of the Discussion between the Rev. D. Gregg, and the Rev. Thomas Maguire. The Gospel and the Gospel only, the Basis of Education: A Sermon preached in St. Peter's Church, Liverpool. By The Cloud of Witnesses; a Series of Discourses on the 11th and part of the 12th Chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews. By the Rev. J. S. M. Anderson, M.A., Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen Dowager, and perpetual Curate of St. George's Four Lectures on the Offices and Ceremonies of Holy Week, The Heavenly Doctrine; or the Gospel of our Lord Jesus 492 The National Religion the Foundation of National Education. A Sermon, preached in the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, London, on Thursday, June 13, 1811, being the time of the yearly meeting of the children educated in the Charity-schools in and about the cities of London and Westminster. By Herbert Marsh, D.D., F.R.S., Margaret Professor of Divinity, Cambridge (late Lord Bishop of Peterborough). Queen Anne's Bounty. What is Queen Anne's Bounty? The Question asked and answered, with reference to the Acts and Neglects of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. By Frederick A Tour in Sweden in 1838; comprising Observations on the Moral, Political, and Economical State of the Swedish Nation. Persecution of Protestants in Ireland. Increase of Romish Chapels in England.. The Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. The Duty of Protestants at the present time. Consumption of Bibles in Britain. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND Quarterly Review. JULY, MDCCCXXXIX. ART. I.-1. A Letter to the Right Rev. Father in God, Richard, Lord Bishop of Oxford, on the tendency to Romanism imputed to Doctrines held of old, as now, in the English Church; with an Appendix containing Extracts from the Tracts for the Times and other Works. By the Rev. E. B. PUSEY, D.D., late Fellow of Oriel College, Regius Professor of Hebrew, and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. Parker, 1839. 2 The Eightieth Tract for the Times. THE moderation which Dr. Pusey has displayed in his letter cannot be denied; but, in our opinion, there is either a partial change of sentiment, or a new via media may be discovered between the Tracts and the objections which have been raised against them. We cannot concede the required authority to many of the authors who have been brought into the argument: for our position is, that our judgment should not be fettered by the private opinions of any, whether or not they be Divines or even Reformers of our Church; that the Liturgy and the Articles are the only writings besides the Bible to which we should sanction an appeal. Hence, we allow not so wide a ramification of the question. Perceiving the veneration which is now expressed towards the Liturgy, we are very naturally surprised that any Tracts should have been published, which contained allusions to its supposed imperfections, that there should have been any regret B concerning the discontinuance of the Seven Services, that any plan for Liturgical perfection should have been sketched: in fact, this veneration for the Liturgy renders it difficult to see any necessity for the Tracts at all. The present controversy must, in every sense, be productive of harm it has created a disunion in the Church at a time when the whole body should be united; it threatens to overwhelm religion in an unedifying routine of formalities, and has given serious grounds of offence, without the offending party recollecting, "woe to him through whom the offence cometh!" The yoke of Mosaic ordinances, from which the Christian Church was emancipatea, was light in comparison with that which is attempted to be imposed upon us; and the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free is sought to be degraded into a most abject spiritual slavery. The writers of the Oxford Tracts may differ from us in opinions and practice, and delight in macerating their bodies; but it is the grossest intolerance to force us to imitate them; nor have they, as individual members of the Church, substantiated their authority to dictate to her. They profess unlimited obedience to the Church, and insist on her authority in interpreting holy writ: nevertheless, they usurp a representation of the Church in their own persons, issue tracts, pronounce what should be her practice, what should be her belief, and have no hesitation in offering as true their own interpretations of the Scriptures. Discrepant as the Fathers frequently are from each other, they claim implicit credence for them, and would select a model of ecclesiastical discipline from their pages, though, as Dr. Macbride says, the Fathers are only witnesses to the customs of their respective ages. Yet no person unbiassed by theory or secret plan-no one who has perused the strange absurdities with which they are fraught-no one who has waded through the instances of their ready credulity, will follow implicitly their guidance, without a better and corroborating authority. We would not be wanting in proper respect to the Fathers, but, having formed our judgment on an attentive perusal of them, we cannot admit them to be the unerring witnesses to the Apostolical Church which they are described to be. To the writers of the Tracts we object, that they do not put the English reader in a condition to form an impartial judgment: they leave the wild theories of the Fathers entirely out of the question; they select the parts relating to ecclesiastical matters which suit them; but they bring not forward those in which the Scriptures have been incorrectly interpreted, those in which mythology has been the subject of extravagant speculation; they adjust not the balance by which their credibility should be determined. If what they have done they conceive they should have done, we affirm they should not have left the others, where the question is so important, undone. We argue, likewise, that if these writers be as averse to Romanism as they affect to be, instead of absurdly stigmatizing all that is Anti-Papistical as "Ultra-Protestant," instead of labouring to draw us into a close similarity to Roman usages, they should make the line of demarcation as distinct as possible. We understand not wherefore the theory should have been partially carried out into practice; wherefore the reading desk should have been forsaken, and some Popish customs should have been adopted; wherefore, an Anti-Romanist should have edited the hymns of the Breviary? Such things are decidedly suspicious, and calculated to arouse the watchfulness of the Church. How much more so, when the Roman Catholics claim the Oxonian party as their own!--when the Popish Magazine lauds their efforts to draw back Protestants to their Church, anticipating from their energies the returning power and influence of Popery in England! when Mr. Welby Pugin almost describes the writers as martyrized by their opponents! Assuredly there must have been something singular in the Tracts, which, whilst it excited our fears, elevated the hopes of the Romanists. Little care we for that which has been thought of our strictures on the Bishop of Oxford; for he has deserved them. He might have checked the schism ere it had acquired power; and to his episcopal negligence the Church has a right to impute the consequences. Instead of so acting, he was the apologist; and the Rubric was consequently forced to cover a multitude of sins. In all that we have written on the subject, we have fearlessly and conscientiously unfolded our ideas of the truth: in all that we shall write, we shall adhere to the same plan. As the consequences become more developed, we see increasing reasons to satisfy us of our accuracy; and the falsehoods to which one writer has resorted, and the ignorance of criticism which he has displayed, prove to us that there must be some latent object, the detection of which has excited his effervescence. Whilst we have no wish to be offensive, we are determined not to be equivocal :-we see no reason to be offensive to Dr. Pusey, for he has not been wanting in the urbanity of a gentleman or the polish of a scholar. Nerertheless we differ from him entirely, and we shall fairly state the grounds of our difference without invective, leaving the public to decide whether his theory, or the practice, in which we have been educated be correct. To begin-The allegation that we do not comprehend Froude's views is equivalent to an assertion that we do not comprehend the plain meaning of words: and the copious quo |