The church systems of England in the nineteenth century

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Preface

No one can be more conscious of the defects of this volume than I am myself It was not till I had accepted the invitation of the Committee of the Congregational Union and consented to deliver a course of Lectures on the Church history of the period, and was actually engaged in preparation for the work, that I fully realized the difficulty of the task I had undertaken. The subject was one which had engaged a great deal of my thought and time, and in agreeing to deal with it, my only idea was to present a general survey of the position of the various Churches which are influencing the religious thought of our country and our generation. But it soon became evident that I could not do this without attempting a fuller examination of the leading ecclesiastical controversies of the time than I had originally intended. I have, of course, treated them from the standpoint of a Congregationalist and one who is committed to the struggle for complete religious equality, but I have anxiously sought to do justice not only to

Preface

the motives, but also to the principles of those to whom I am conscientiously opposed. I do not delude myself with the idea that in this I have succeeded to the extent of my own desire, but I hope that even those who arc most ready to point out my failure will, at least, give me credit for honesty of purpose. I can, at all events, say that no differences of opinion would ever be allowed by me consciously to influence my Judgments of character or to aflect my relations to good men who arc scr\-ing the great Master to whom I seek to dedicate my own life. If my personal respect for them docs not prevent me from opposing their views, it is because I believe that such discussions arc essential to the full development of truth, and that Christian character may even gain by them, provided they be conducted with fairness and courtesy, in the growth of a wiser tolerance and a broader sympathy.

A lecture on " Ultramontanism " formed part of my original plan. It has been omitted not from any doubt as to the importance of the subject, but from the impossibility of treating it with any adequacy within the necessary limits of this volume. If God be pleased to give me health and strength, I indulge the hope of some day finding leisure for the separate discussion of a system which wears so alarming an aspect to numbers, and which, at all events, has made such aggressions of late years as to render it incumbent on all Protestants to try and understand the nature of its power and resources, so as to be prepared to offer it an intelligent as well as strenuous resistance. In the meantime, let

Preface. ix

me say, it is so distinctly a foreign system that I do not feel that its omission interferes with the completeness of the present survey.

I am indebted to my valued friend Mr. R. W. Dale for kindly revising the proofs. The pains which he has bestowed upon a wearisome task, and the valuable suggestions which he has thrown out in the course of the revision, deserve my heartiest acknowledgment ; but this service constitutes a small fraction of the debt I owe to a friendship which is not only one of the truest joys, but also one of the most healthful and stimulating influences of my life.

I have only further to express my obligations to the Committee of the Congregational Union for the honour they did me in inviting me to undertake this work, and for the patience with which they waited for the long delayed fulfilment of my promise. It has been extremely difficult to snatch from the incessant calls of pastoral and public service the time necessary for the preparation of these lectures, and I feel how much I owe to the considerate thoughtfulness of a loyal and attachedcongregation, who under the pressure of this work have shown me a sympathy and indulgence which I am bound thus gratefully to recognize.

The service here completed has been done for the honour of the great Head of the Church. The one question as to every system is how far it is in harmony with His will, and is calculated to promote His glory. In every Church, as in every age and every land, arc those who love Him, and there is, perhaps, not one of

X Preface.

our systems which has not its 'own distinctive feature of excellence, and has not made its own special contribution to the "edifying of the body of Christ" I trust that I have never been forgetful of this in any criticisms I have passed upon what to me appear to be errors, but rather have rejoiced to acknowledge that " amid the differences of administrations there is the same Lord," and "amid all diversities of operation it is the same God which worketh all in all,"

J. GUINNESS ROGERS.

Clapham Common, May, 1881.

Contents

LECTURE I.

I'ACR

The Age and the Churches .... i

I

As has been said, the changes of the century have not involved the downfall of any of our Church systems. It is possible to go further, and say that in none of them can we find any of those indications of decay, or even weakness, which would lead any candid and thoughtful observer to prophesy their approaching downfall. Ardent Erastians may fancy that the Free Churches of England, after weathering the storms and troubles of centuries^ after vindicating their right to exist by the unquestioned service which they have rendered to the nation and the kingdom of Christ, and after attaining a numerical strength and moral influence hardly, if at all inferior, tothe Established Church itself, are silently but rapidly crumbling to pieces ; that their bodies will before long^ be consigned to the tomb, and that their only hope of a. future life is in the resurrection of their glorified spirits in a comprehensive Establishment, where all individual conviction will be suppressed and the will of the State be .supreme ; and in a blissful future, when scruples of conscience will be regarded as painful memories of an evil past, and perfect unity be enjoyed in the calm repose of a passionless and faithless culture. On the other hand, there may be uncompromising enemies of sacerdotalism and hierarchical rule who fancy that the root of both is to be found in a State Church, and that in the coming era of religious equality, no place will be left for evil growths contrary to the whole genius of Christianity. So, too, the believers in a Catholic Church may please themselves with the hope that all heretics will yet submit, and while Anglicans dream confidently of the reconciliation of Dissenters, Ultramontanes may

I.] The Age and the Churches, 1 1

indulge in the same certainty of the submission of Anglicans themselves to the Papal See. But such anticipations on all sides are rather the longings and forecasts of a passionate hope than the results of careful induction from accepted facts.

Assuredly there is not any symptom even of incipient disease threatening such a disastrous consummation to any of our Protestant communities. Disastrous it may well be regarded, for it is difficult to see how any of the distinctive forms under which Church life has developed itself in Protestant Christendom could cease to exist, unless the gospel were beginning to lose its hold upon the hearts and lives of its men. There are few more useless occupations in which men can engage than that of proselytism ; there is no dream more chimerical than that of the sectary, who hopes to sec his own system extend by the overthrow of others. I^tween authority and conscience, between priestly assumption and individual liberty, between a religion of the spirit and a religion of forms and ritual, there must be conflict d, outrance. But between the several forms of Church polity there is no need for this perpetual antagonism, and it can only be carried on at the cost of that religion which must be dearer to all than any of their isms. The weakening of any of our Protestant systems docs not necessarily mean an accession of strength to any other, but, in all probability, points rather to a decay of the faith common to all.

At present there are not even indications that any one of these systems is gaining decided advantage over the rest. There are signs everywhere that each is exercising an influence, more or less manifest, upon its rivals, and it is a fair subject for consideration as to where the leavening force is most powerful. Certain it is that communities are sometimes permeated by ideas to an extent of which they are themselves unconscious, until the effects are revealed in changes which at one time would have seemed impracticable. This is a process which has been going on in our Church systems. They have told upon one another gradually and silently, until now there may be traced in them distinct resemblances, which may be very displeasing to bigoted precisians of all parties, but which dispassionate observers will regard rather as evidencing the growth of wisdom and charity in our Church affairs. Congrcgationalists flatter themselves that their teaching and influence have not been lost upon any of the Churches around, and they, in their turn, would point to facts which to them indicate that Congregationalism has received as well as given. Still the dominant idea of each system remains untouched, and those who are most ready to profit by the example of others, and adopt innovations that do not militate against their own fundamental principle, cling to it with a tenacity that is not less because it has been proved to be the more likely to relax its grasp of the central truth, but with it is associated a capacity for adapting it to varying conditions. Possibly the importance attached to the points which differentiate our several forms of polity is materially reduced, not only in the view of a world disposed to cry a plague on all our Churches, and to regard our controversies as idle disputes about curious points, which can have no living interest for rational human beings, but even in the estimation of those who have decided denominational preferences. But this does not foreshadow the absorption of any one Church in another. So great a change could be

I

TJte Age and titc Churches. ij '

the result only of a strong conviction that the absorbing Church had vindicated its right to some exclusive claim, either by overwhelming demonstration of its 3uthorit>', or by service of transcendent excellence, or ihat the Church which was absorbed had given some equally conclusive proof of its weakness. But this is exactly what is not implied by the more catholic view of the relations between their several systems which prevails among enlightened Protestants. That broad conception of their sectarian divisions is due rather to a feeling that the world, with its variety of temperament, character, and culture, needs them all, and that to destroy any would be to withdraw influences which tell upon a particular class, whose wants arc not met by others, and that that class, whatever its importance may be, would not be attracted by any other, but would, in all probability, be lost to Christianity. Everj-whcre there may, nay, must be, need of reform. In some cases there may have been developments vrhich are essentially injurious not only to the particular Church in which they appear, but to Christianity itself. which must be resisted, even though the removal of the accretions should be fatal to the sj'stcm. But this does not affect the point, that it is not possible to cast Church life into one mould, and that instead of those strivings after uniformitj, which have wrought such evil in past days, the aim should be the cultivation of a spirit of true unit}'.

The address of the Archbishop of Cantcrburj-, at his recent triennta.1 visitation, furnishes abundant evidence of the growth of this temper. If there is any man

14 Tlie Age and the Churches, [lect.

whose official position might dispose him to a contrary feeling, the Primate is certainly the man. The State has placed him at the head of the National Church, the only Church which, according to some of our teachers, has any right to exist Dissenters are rebels against the authority which the law has committed to him, and that authority his clergy, and the defenders of his Church generally, hold him bound to maintain, not so much for his own sake as for that of the Church of which he is the spiritual ruler. Ambition can hardly covet a more exalted position, and every prejudice of his nature as well as all the influences of his ^surroundings would lead him to guard its dignity with all jealousy. Yet the archbishop feels himself constrained, partly in obedience to the catholic instincts of a true Christian heart, but partly also as a man of practical judgment, who feels that he has to deal with facts and not mere ideals, to speak of these ecclesiastical rebels as fellow-workers in the kingdom of God. In theory they may be schismatics, but in fact they are contending for the same faith, serving the same Master, labouring to promote the same ends, as the Church to which they find themselves unable to conform.

It will be our own fault if all the Protestant communities throughout the world, Episcopal and non-Episcopal, which adhere to the Apostolic faith, do not feel that their cause is indissolubly united with our own. . . . The Church of Christ throughout the world would, it must be remembered, be deprived of a vast proportion of its worshippers if we left out of sight our Christian brotherhood with non- Episcopal congregations at home, and the overwhelming mass of such congregations in the United States of America. Thus, I trust, we English Churchmen arc learning more and more to realize once again that great idea which was so powerful of old to stir men's hearts and make them help each other, that there is a vast community cemented by Christian faith and principle

1.] The Age and the Churc/us. 15

whichy amid all national and other special differences, joins together the whole body of those who worship God in Christ.'

And again —

The existence of Dissent from the National Church is a fact -which we cannot overlook. We deplore it, but we cannot act as if there were no such thing in the land as dissent on the part of good men ; and I am sure that we all feel that it is our duty to meet the inevitable state of circumstances in which we find ourselves in a tolerant Christian spirit'

A declaration like this, coming from the chair of Canterbury, surely marks a new era in our ecclesiastical relations. It is not for its novelty, or originality, or its special catholicity, that such an utterance is remarkable, but for the authority which belongs to it as coming from the Primate of all England. Not only have numbers of men thought or said as much before, but the facts were too patent to be denied except by extreme partizans. What is striking is that the Archbishop of Canterbury should have given them this public recognition, and have accentuated the record by placing it thus prominently in his address to his own clergy. The more his statements are examined in detail and in relation to the rest of his charge, the more significant do they appear. There is not any sign that the archbishop has any idea of abating the hostility of Nonconformists to the Establishment by the cultivation of kindly relations with them as Christians. In frank and manly style he acknowledges that in relation to the rights of the State Church there is difference, and difference that must produce conflict, and yet he maintains there need not be estrangement and hostility. He thus proves that he has grasped the true idea of Christian union, which is not

» The Church of the Future^ pp. 13, 14. ^ Ibid. p. 17.

1 6 The Age and tlie Churches. [leciv

the suppression of differences, but the manifestation of a tolerant Christian temper through them all.

Nor is his catholicity of so molluscous a type, and so lacking in all strength of principle, that it degeneratesinto indifference to theological doctrine altogether. The body in which he desires to see unity manifested consists of those who "worship God in Christ." The language is general, and may no doubt be extended beyond what he himself intended, or what loyalty to the gospel would justify. But it is certainly very different from that weak sentiment which some dignify with the name of religion, and even of Christianity, although the i^otaries of this vague and hazy system are not quite certain whether there is a God to claim their worship, or, if there be, whether it is through Christ that they are able to approach Him. Here is a distinctly Christian basis for the fellowship ; and though the description may be abused or misrepresented, it is not easy to see how it could be well improved, either on the side of comprehensiveness or exclusiveness. For from the spiritual confederation of Christendom none should be debarred who " worship God in Christ ; " and it is certainly hard to see how any who do not can have the semblance of a claim to admission. Christians, it cannot be too strongly insisted upon, are followers of Christ. Not all those who, according to their lights, are tr>'ing to be good and to live for the good of others are Christians, but those only who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as their Saviour, and ser\'e Him as their Master, whose struggles after a holy life are inspired by love to Him, aided by faith in Him, prosecuted for His sake, conducted in obedience to His will, and anticipate as their one reward admission to His joy. There have been noble-

1.] Tlie Age mid tlie Chtirclies, 17

minded pagans, but it would be an abuse of language to call them Christians. Marqus Aurelius was not a Christian, though he was a man of lofty moral purpose and rare virtue, with much of the Christian spirit in him ; and there may be men of his type to-day, with moral qualities as eminent, and yet as utterly without faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. No judgment is passed upon such men when it is said that they have neither part nor lot in Christ's kingdom. They would scorn the idea of the fellowship themselves. They do not profess to be Christians, and they arc not Christians. What the Archbishop recognizes is the brotherhood of Christians^ as manifest in the unity of faith, principle, and worship which underlies the varieties of creed, polity, or ritual.

III

It is a successor of Laud who has propounded this catholic vie\v of Anglican Christendom, and such an utterance, coming from such a quarter, is a very marked sign that the old dispensation is passing away and a new one is beginning to take its place. There is a very remarkable confession made by the Archbishop, which makes this recognition of the Christian brotherhood of Dissenters still more significant. He is clear-sighted enough to perceive the strength of a feeling among his ou-n clergy' which would make this view peculiarly obnoxious to them, and yet he does not hesitate to place himself in direct antagonism to it Speaking of the influence exerted by the " Oxford revival of forty or fifty years ago," he says —

Still, I think this must be granted on the other hand — that the teaching thus introduced or resuscitated, notwithstanding all its claims to catholicit)', was and is based on a somewhat narrow

.7

1 8 TJte Age and the Churc/ies, [lect.

system, and has confined Churchmen's sympathies in the direction in which before they were ready to expand. My predecessors in the Episcopate had, I think, less difficulty than we should experience now-a-days in welcoming the co-operation of such men as was Robert Hall in the days of our fathers, and wishing them Godspeed in their labours to resist prevailing infidelity.'

The phenomenon is certainly remarkable, but it is one eminently characteristic of an age which is full of such contrasts. At no period has Church sentiment been so exalted, and yet never has it been met, even within the confines of the Established Church itself, by an opposite current of true catholic feeling more strong and decided. But so it is everywhere. By the side of the most extreme and intolerant assertions of authority we have a rationalism more daring in its spirit, more audacious in its denials, more defiant in its attitude, and more reckless in its speculations than at any previous period. Science has so far extended its empire, and brought so many regions that were once supposed to belong to the world of mystery within the range of its law, that its teachers may seem to have some excuse even for the extravagant pretensions which would seat it on the throne of universal empire, and leave faith without a province of the vast dominions over which its sceptre once extended ; and yet on the same pages which record some of these wonderful achievements of science is inscribed the story of some outburst of fanatical superstition which carries us back to mediaeval times, and makes us feel that the spell of these mysteries is still upon large masses of our people. It is an age of extremes, and not very tolerant of the pleasant compromises which endured in less exciting periods ; but these extremes may be either in the one direction or

* Church of the Future^ p. l6.

Tlte Age and the Churches. rg

the other. Men arc disturbed in the quiet resting-places where their fathers dwelt at case, and the self-same influences acting upon them, as in the case of the two distinguished brothers, whose story is itself a picture of the age, have carried them far as the poles asunder. Sometimes the two currents strangely blend ; thus the Anglican school combines with the most profound reverence for antiquity, which approaches to a superstition, an eager thirst for novelty that seems ready to adopt any expedient if it can impress the popular imagination. It exalts the authority of the Holy Catholic Church, and claims to be its representative, and yet jis willing, in a spirit of strong utilitarianism, to accept a m in practical method from any sect of Dissenters. But the characteristic feature of the times is the presence of these two opposing influences, each of which is developed to its utmost limit, while both arc impatient of all attempts to mediate between them. It is the age of the Ultramontane and the Agnostic, and the one point

Ion which they a^cc is that the future will belong exclusively to one of them, and that a final conflict must <lctcnninc which shall remain master of the field. The Primate furnishes an illustration of the struggle between these opposing tendencies. The Ritualist party, who unquestionably have done much to increase the influence of the Church of England, would maintain the Stilts of what they call Catholicity, and treat Dissenters «s schbmatics and aliens from the spiritual commonwealth, with whom there can be no religious fellowship. But the I'rimale knows that the strongest influences of the day arc against such exclusivcness, that a temper at once more liberal and more practical is abroad, and that if there be anywhere a disposition to revive

Church authority, its tendency is towards that Church in which authority finds its legitimate representative. He spoke the feelings of the great body of the laity of his own Church and of all Churches in those words of soberness, common sense, and Christian charity, in which he acknowledged in effect that all our Protestant Churches form part of one confederation, whose members may on some points have different opinions and conflicting interests, but who yet have common principles, common sympathies, and common ends, the transcendent importance of which may well serve to moderate the eagerness with which sectional objects are pursued, and to prevent the rivalry of principles from degenerating into the petty warfare of hostile sects.

IV

This is the true ideal of Christian union, and there are few, if any, among Dissenters who would not heartily unite in the desire of the Archbishop for its realization. If there are no signs that any of our religious bodies are prepared to give up their own distinctive polity, there are abundant proofs that the leaders of all are less disposed to insist on an exclusive scriptural authority for their system, and more ready to concede the wisdom of a diversity in form of Church government, more inclined to treat the question of polity as one of expediency rather than of Divine prescription. The advocate of each of the three leading systems finds, or thinks he finds, its germ in the New Testament. The Episcopalian points to Timothy and Titus as diocesan bishops. The Presbyterian discovers the model of synodical action in the meeting at and fa ^^^_ " hcav

Jenisalem, by which the difficult questions that had mrisen between the Jciv and the Gentile were decided. The Congr^ationalist finds his system everywhere, and his strong belief that the primitive Churches were selfcming societies, each under the presidency of its own ^hop, is confirmed by the admissions of the more indid class of opponents. Tracing the history of the Ihurch through the centuries, the Episcopalian would irge that he had been the guardian of order ; the csbjlerian, that he had furnished the example of the lost perfect organization and the most careful orthothe Congregationalist, that in the Churches l^of his type liberty had had its perfect work and the unrestrained energies of Christian zeal their fullest development There is no probability that any party will abandon its ground or materially change its contention. But the more reflective and candid men on all Ics are free to admit that there are points in which rivals have an advantage over them. They believe if course that, on the whole, the advantage belongs to the system which they have conscientiously adopted ; but in adhering to it, they accept it as a human development of a Divine thought, in which there arc sure to be imperfections. If the Apostle could speak of himseU and his brethren as "earthen vessels" in which was "heavenly treasure," why need we hesitate to take the line view of our Church systems? Following out this :stion, wc may expect that in them there will be not only flaws, but diversities, according to the character of the minds which have shaped them, and that tbCK ver>- diversities will only render them more suited to the varied wants of the world. Let this be realized and men will cease to dream of uniformity, and will not

The Age and the Churches.

[lect.

greatly c systems.

e to win other Christians to their own special Their love to their own Church need not be less sincere, nor their efforts for its prosperity less earnest and untiring, because they believe that there are those to whom a different kind of Church life is more suited, and whose spiritual natures will develope with greater richness and beauty under a system which on themselves would exert a cramping and deforming influence.

This view is utterly fatal to High Church theories on all sides, but practically it is only with the advanced section of the Anglican Church that it comes into conflict. If there be those among Dissenting communities who hold that theirs is the one Divine system, and that all who are outside its circle are outside the Church of Christ, they take their oivn independent action, and have neither the po«'cr nor the desire to force their views upon others. With the High Church party in the Establishment it is verj- different. They speak in the name of the nation, and from the lofty pedestal of a public position, and thus they compel attention which would be refused to them as individuals. It is not possible to ignore them and their claim, which is asserted with a dogmatism and vehemence in exact proportion to the weakness of the evidence adduced in its favour, and which cannot be admitted by Dissenters without a practical confession that they are not of the heavenly kingdom. But it is verj- ca.sy to exaggerate the force which this party actually possesses. Its convictions are strong, and by some of its members are defended with great ability. In its ranks are to be found some men of brilliant gifts, and numbers of devoted piety and pure consecration. It has a high social standing, and exercises

The Age and the Churches.

great influence in a certain circle. Various circumstances have told in its favour, and secured for it tacit acquiescence where it has not been able to secure active sympathy. Between it and Erastianism there can be no real concord, and yet Erastians, alarmed for the security of their favourite institution, have tolerated the aggressions of sacerdotalism. It has profited even by the growth of the Liberalism which it hates, and has won s>-mpathy and support from numbers who repudiate its claims and detest its principles, but who honour many of its teachers for the lives they lead and the noble service which the>- render.