iv PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION. podo-baptist, to adjust them to the normal practice of his church. That they can be satisfactorily adjusted to this exceptional case is the Author's full conviction; but to state the argument fully would require some space, and an imperfect statement might lead to misapprehension. in If on the important subject discussed the work should be found any instance to have promoted sound Scriptural and Protestant views, the Author's object in sending it forth will have been fully attained. OXFORD, March 14, 1856. 8. Douglas Wyeth, Agt., Stereotyper, PREFACE. THOUGH it is presumed that the reader will meet with nothing in the following pages but what the title prepares him for, it is very probable that he will look for several topics which, in works of this kind, are commonly discussed, but in the present are omitted. It may be proper, therefore, to state briefly the nature and scope of the work. The course of the great controversy which has been so long agitating the Church of England must have impressed the attentive observer with the importance of a scientific acquaintance, especially on the part of the clergy, with the fundamental differences between Romanism and Protestantism, as opposite systems of dogmatic theology. This branch of study, so proper to a Protestant Church, had, for various reasons, fallen into neglect, until circumstances, which have become matter of history, forced it upon public attention. Among these reasons may be mentioned the historical, rather than doctrinal, character of our theologythe absence, hitherto at least, in this country of a learned, if not of an agressive, Romanism, such as exists abroad, and there calls forth a corresponding activity on the part of Protestant theologians—and, not least, the indifference, not to say positive aversion, which, since the time of Laud, has been exhibited towards evangelical Protestantism, the real antagonist of Romanism, by a large and influential section of the English clergy. The consequences of this neglect have been such as might have been expected. In its earlier stages the tractarian movement appeared to have gained a complete triumph on the ground of historical and philosophical disquisition. Men were taken by surprise, and arguments appeared convincing simply because they were not familiar to the minds of those to whom they were addressed. Our younger clergy especially, unversed in the study of the Romish controversy, were seduced in numbers by the attractive, and to them novel, guise in which the reasonings of ν Bellarmin and Bossuet were re-produced, and imbibed Romish principles without suspecting the source whence the poison was derived. That this state of things should continue is neither creditable nor safe. The nation, indeed, has uttered its judgment on the momentous questions at issue with a voice which cannot be mistaken; but, in times like ours, we need something more than the protest of a healthy Christian instinct, such as the laity of this country have given expression to, against the errors of the church system. The adherents of the Reformation, if they would maintain their ground amidst the various opposing influences which surround them, must be prepared, not only to contend zealously for the apostolic faith, but to justify, both to themselves and to others, their adherence thereto. If Protestantism show itself incapable of wielding any other weapons than those of popular declamation, it is to be feared that, in an inquiring age like our own, when every system is undergoing a process of sifting, it will be compelled to abandon the field to its antagonists, whether Romish or rationalistic. In short, an intelligent and scientific study of the doctrinal differences between ourselves and Rome appears to be at the present time peculiarly needful; and if upon any section of our Church this duty seems to be more incumbent than upon others, it is that to which the epithet of evangelical has, whether rightly or wrongly, been attached, and which, as recent events have abundantly shown, is the natural antagonist of Rome. It may be thought that, the immediate danger which menaced the Church of England having passed away, a discussion of this kind is no longer opportune; but, independently of the subject's being one of permanent and universal interest, it would be a great mistake to suppose that, because the leaders of the movement have passed over to a more congenial territory, the principles which they inculcated with such zeal and success within our own pale have disappeared with them. Those principles, by whatever name they may be called, whether Catholic, or Church, or Sacramental, are still rife amongst us, and in active operation: in truth, the contest between evangelical and ecclesiastical Christianity is as old as the Gospel itself, and may be expected to continue to the end of time. Moreover, it is impossible to overlook the significance of the recent attitude which the Church of Rome has assumed within these dominions. Politically she has experienced a signal repulse; but there is every reason to expect that a systematic assault will be made by theologians of her communion, of a higher grade than the controversialists best known in this country, on the foundations of Protestantism, which it will need every weapon of argument and research successfully to meet. To call attention to this field of theological inquiry, hitherto too much neglected amongst us, is the object of the following work. The chief aim of the writer has been to bring out fully to view the ultimate doctrinal principles which lie at the root of each system respectively; and to point out how these principles naturally give rise to the visible results with which the world is familiar. Hence it is that several questions, the determination of which depends chiefly upon an investigation of facts,—such as the alleged supremacy of the Bishop of Rome in the fourth or fifth century, or the alleged invalidity of our English orders-are but briefly touched upon; while an unusually large space is devoted to purely doctrinal discussions. Indeed these discussions may be thought to occupy too large a space by those who do not bear in mind that the topic of the Church is, in fact, an epitome of the whole Romish controversy, all the other differences of view on original sin, justification, and the sacraments, here combining to produce a single result. To this abstract mode of treating the subject the writer has been led, partly from a conviction that too much stress has been laid upon the external, to the overlooking of the interior, points of difference between us and Rome, and partly because our theology is as rich in historical refutations of the pretensions of the Papacy as it is barren in expositions of the doctrinal grounds on which the system rests. The ground assumed throughout is that of evangelical Protestantism, the Protestantism of Luther, Calvin, and our own reformers, as distinguished from the political, eclectic, and rationalistic systems which, at different times, have taken its place. The latter systems, which often exhibit as wide a divergency from the genuine teaching of the reformers as that of Trent itself, have been frequently tried, and found of no power to withstand the encroachments of the adversary. From the time of Erasmus downwards, the mere negation of Romish doctrine has proved insufficient for this purpose; and if in the conflict which appears to be impending between us and our ancient opponent, we are to come off victorious, it must be by taking our stand on the positive doctrines of the Reformation. But while the writer has been at no pains to conceal the side which he takes, it has been his aim to avoid those one-sided representations of the opposite system, which only repel the candid mind, and, by the reaction of senti ment which they occasion, do more injury than good to the cause of truth. To maintain that Romanism is not even a form of Christianity, can serve no good purpose, and is to overlook the essential distinction between faith, however imperfectly informed, and unbelief. A dispassionate impartiality in comparing the sys, tem of Trent with our own, and a promptitude to acknowledge whatever merits or defects may exist on each side, are quite compatible with a hearty conviction of the fundamental truth of Protestantism; and these qualities it has been throughout the desire of the writer to cultivate. Indeed, the scientific character of the work would, of itself, have rendered any exaggerated statements, or appeals to popular feeling, out of place. It is proper to apprize the reader that one division only of the controversy on the subject of the Church-viz. the nature and constitution of the Christian society-is here discussed; the authority of the Church, and the various questions relating to tradition and the rule of faith, not entering into the plan of the work. The arrangement adopted may be briefly stated. In the first book an attempt is made to fix the true idea of the Church —that is, to determine whether it is, as the Romanist would have it, primarily an external institution; or, as Protestantism teaches, a society which has its true being or differentia within. If the discussion should here seem unnecessarily extended, it must be remembered that this question lies at the very root of the controversy, and, moreover, is not often found discussed by our own divines in a satisfactory manner. The second book is devoted to the consideration of the predicates, or attributes, of the Church, as expressed in the Catholic creeds, and in the rival confessions. The third book contains an exposition of the differences between us and Rome on the subject of the Christian ministry. On each head the plan pursued has been, first, to determine from the authenticated statements of each party what the real point at issue is, and then to examine to which side truth inclines. With respect to the labours of the learned in this department of theology, it has already been observed that amongst ourselves it has not been much cultivated. We have treatises against Romanism in abundance, but it has not occurred to the writer to meet with any work in English theology (Bishop Marsh's small treatise excepted) the professed object of which is to institute a scientific comparison between the doctrinal confessions of the two great sections of the Christian world. Neither does the valuable work of Field on the Church, nor the more recent treatise of Mr |