discovered that the Pope was the Antichrist of the Apocalypse, when it was so easy for Mr. Todd, or any other watchful critic, to adduce against him Wicliffe, Chaucer, Dante, and even the clergy of Italy, at the beginning of the sixteenth century? Is it possible, as Mr. Todd himself observes, that Mr. Butler, in citing Bp. Taylor as a high authority on his side, should not have known that he was citing the Bishop against himself? that there was in existence a well known after-work of that admired prelate, seventeen years younger than his " Liberty of Prophesying;" in which "his reading and judgment being more matured," to use Mr. T.'s expression, he holds a totally different opinion? See Introduct. pp. xxiv, xxv, &c.

But it is time to turn to the original work of Cranmer, reprinted in this volume, by the judicious care and attention of Mr. Todd. We have read it, not for the first time, but with particular delight; and have found it fully to answer Mr. Todd's description of it, as abounding in "examples of irresistible argumentation, as well as impressive eloquence." He apologizes for some archaisms and vulgarisms peculiar to the times in which it was written-but indeed they are very few; and we are much disposed to thank him for modernizing the language, because its perspicuity of style is such, that it would be distressing to be impeded by an obsolete orthography. Of the contents of the work a judgment may be formed, from the following account of it by Fox, whose words Mr. Todd has transcribed, and whose fame he has ably vindicated, in conjunction with Dr. Wordsworth, against the rude and unjustifiable censures of Dr. Milner and other Romanists. The following is Fox's account of Cranmer's great work.

"During the time of king Henry the Eighth, until the entering of king Edward, it seemeth that Cranmer was scarcely yet thoroughly persuaded in the right knowledge of the Sacrament, or at least was not fully ripened in the same; wherein shortly after being more groundedly confirmed by conference with Bishop Ridley, in process of time did so profit in riper knowledge, that at last he took upon him the defence of that whole doctrine, that is, to refute and throw down, first, the corporal presence; secondly, the fantastical transubstantiation; thirdly, the idolatrous adoration; fourthly, the false error of the Papists, that wicked men do eat the natural body of Christ; and lastly, the blasphemous sacrifice of the Mass. Whereupon, in conelusion, he wrote five books for the publick instruction of the Church of England: which instruction yet to this day standeth, and is received in this Church of England." Introduc. p. iii.

Perhaps this summary of the contents of the work repub

VOL. II. NO. III.

G

lished by Mr. Todd, may tempt some persons to ask, whether it be at all suitable to the present times; whether there can be, not merely any necessity for reprinting such arguments, but any utility in putting people in mind of such exploded errors as the corporal presence, the fantastical transubstantiation, &c. &c.? Were we expected to give answer to any such enquiries, we confess we should be disposed to say, that if knowledge be preferable to ignorance, there never was a time in which it was more necessary, or might be more useful, to solicit the attention of the public to such topics, or recal men's recollections to the transactions of past ages. We do not believe, from the time of Henry VIII. to the present day, there was ever so much ignorance displayed as in the debates of a certain assembly, within the compass only of a few weeks or months just past. Indeed, if these be properly and correctly reported, we need be mortified to think how little the real character of the Reformation is understood by persons, who, from their high and eminent station, and the trust reposed in them by the sovereign and the nation, ought to know better. We speak not of those young nobles and sportsmen, whom we cannot expect to be sound divines, but we allude to much graver personages; men of power and influence, of unquestionable talents, and known education, who, if they do not understand such matters as divines, might and ought to know them historically. How short a time is it since Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation were spoken of in the assembly to which we allude, as ignorantly, and, we are sorry to say, as sportively, as if nothing of any importance now depended upon a proper understanding of those terms; whereas, in our estimation, never before did so much depend upon it. Let us not be supposed so unacquainted with the world, as to fancy that the long word Transubstantiation is much likely to engage the attention of the public, or that in reality we are much in danger of being wearied with discussions about the corporal presence in the Eucharist; these, we know well enough, are things not likely to happen, but then we must be allowed to add, it is because they are not likely to happen, that we are more afraid of the doctrines themselves. To be explicit, we confidently believe that even cabinet ministers, that is some cabinet ministers, may be ignorant, or may have forgotten, that the whole power of the Catholic priesthood may still be said to depend on the term Transubstantiation. For it is through the witchcraft (or hocus pocus, as Archbishop Tillotson would call it) of this word, that the whole trade of Popery is carried on. The corporal presence, or transmutation of the bread and wine into the real flesh and blood of the Redeemer,

is the only foundation on which the Catholic priesthood rest their “ gainful traffic of private masses." They have it in their power, through the credulity of an ignorant people, not merely to commemorate, by symbols, the one great sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, but through the doctrine of Transubstantiation, to pretend to offer afresh that very sacrifice for the sins of all who have money enough to pay for it, for the sins indeed of quick and dead, and to receive payment for it, either direct or testamentary. What an influence does this give; and what an interest must be excited in certain quarters to keep up, as well as to augment such a traffic! Here is the danger ;and those who are ignorant of it in this Protestant country, cannot be too soon awakened to a sense of its proximity.

On two accounts, therefore, we would recommend this curious volume to the notice and attention of the public: First, that through Mr. Todd's able Introduction, they may be taught to be cautious how they trust the advocates of the Romish cause, be they never so eminent; and secondly, that they may be brought to understand, by Archbishop Cranmer's incomparable Treatise, how little foundation there is in Scripture, in reason, in the writings of the fathers, and in the opinions of our most eminent Reformers, for that mysterious doctrine of Transubstantiation, which STILL lies at the root of all the superstition, credulity, and abject submission of the people in every country in which the Roman Catholic religion is predominant.

A Letter to C. Butler, Esq. of Lincoln's Inn, in vindication of English Protestants from his attack upon their sincerity in the "Book of the Roman Catholic Church." By C. J. BLOMFIELD, D.D. Bishop of Chester. 8vo. p. 36. 1s. London. Rivingtons. 1825.

A Letter to the Right Reverend C. J. Blomfield, D.D. Bishop of Chester; from C. BUTLER, ESQ. in Vindication of a Passage in his "Book of the Roman Catholic Church," censured in a Letter addressed to him by his Lordship. 8vo. p. 32. 1s. London. Murray.

1825.

THE Bishop of Chester, moved by a generous indignation at the insult Mr. Butler offered to the clergy of the Established Church, (in his Book, p. 170.) has by a firm remonstrance induced him to disavow the most offensive meaning of his words.

The passage will be found at length in our last Review; and we are glad to strengthen our comments on it, by the following animadversions of this learned Prelate.

"You assume, as a matter of notoriety, that the great body of the English Clergy, ten or twelve thousand ministers of the Gospel, many of them not less learned, nor less sagacious than yourself, are hypocrites and liars: that for the sake of preferment, no necessity compelling them, they set their solemn attestation to that which they do not believe to be true, and place their souls in jeopardy. I know not what answer can be given to such insinuations as these, except a posi tive and indignant denial.

"You are probably not aware, Sir, how many young men of respectable abilities and acquirements enter into the ministry of the church, who have no prospect whatever of preferment, properly so called: who have no hope of obtaining more than a pittance far inferior to that which they might have obtained as tradesmen, farmers, or even as mechanics. Will you, Sir, seriously contend that fifty or sixty pounds a-year, is a bribe, sufficiently large and tempting to induce a young man of education, and of serious habits to set his solemn testimony to the truth of that which he believes to be false? Yet I could, produce to you, in my own diocese, many instances of pious, able and exemplary clergymen, who are labouring in their vocation, and doing the work of an Evangelist, for no greater sums than these.

"You have charged us with prevarication: it had been scarcely, if at all more opprobrious had you termed us Atheists; but that is a hard work, and open undisguised abuse would have alarmed many, who may be taken off their guard by smooth and easy inuendoes : 'his words were softer than oil, yet were they drawn swords."'" P. 8.

"To your question, ' are these doctrines (of the thirty-nine articles) seriously and sincerely believed by the great body of the present English clergy?' we answer unhesitatingly, yes; and we make the same answer in the name, and on the behalf of the laity: whether in or out of the Established Church. Upon these points there is no difference of belief between us, and the great body of Protestant Dissenters.

"It is a stale and hacknied artifice of writers in your communion, to charge the English clergy with Socinianism: but I am truly surprised and mortified that a person of your acuteness and candour, should have condescended to repeat this oft-told, oft-refuted tale.” P. 11.

"You have yourself in strong terms deprecated the unfairness of imputing to the principles of a church, the individual obliquities of a few of its members. It is indeed astonishing, that the advocate of candour, forbearance, and charitableness, should have taken it for granted, absolutely without proof or authority of any kind, that indifference to the thirty-nine articles is universal, or at least general, amongst the members of the Established Church, whether clergy or laity and particularly to those of the thirty-nine articles, which assert the fundamental and vital doctrines of Christianity. Once more, then,,

:

let me speak for both Churchmen, and Dissenters, and protest with all earnestness and sincerity, against this most uncharitable and unwarranted insinuation. Yet were it not for a regard to your own character, I could almost thank you for having hinted it; for it affords a most clear and indubitable evidence, that there is something in the spirit of the Roman Catholic religion, which neither time nor experience can alter ; which contains the germ of intolerance and persecution; which poisons the fountain of truth, obscures and blunts the most sagacious intellect, and represses the natural movements of a just and ingenuous mind." P. 14.

We do not quite understand why the Bishop has undertaken to answer in this matter for the Dissenters, who upon occasion well know how to speak for themselves, and to defend the rights of private judgment. The Dissenters, for individual liberty-the Roman Catholics, for infallible power by Divine right,—the Esta blished Church, for lawful authority: these are the old lines of a controversy, which is perhaps again to be revived.

The following quotation from Bishop Atterbury's letters is happily applied by the Bishop of Chester to his opponent.

"He seldoms speaks out where he is likely to offend, but contents himself often times rather to insinuate than affirm; and makes use of other men's words to express his own sense, when he is unwilling too openly to own it, or too strongly to press it, ab arte sua non recessit, as Tully says of Aristoxenus." P. 16.

It is indeed suprising that Mr. Butler should have chosen to borrow the sneer of an infidel, in order " to accuse the English clergy at large of the grossest and most soul-endangering prevarication and hypocrisy; at the moment he is delivering a lecture upon the true mode of controversy, and in a juncture of affairs, when, if not charity, at least worldly wisdom, would suggest the propriety of conciliating the members of the Established Church, What reason, plausible or solid, can be assigned for the reluctance of churchmen to admit the Roman Catholics to civil power, except this alone, the sincerity of our Protestant principles? Well may the Bishop say, "Surely, Sir, you cannot justly complain of Mr. Southey's having applied to certain practices of the Roman Church, the epithets idolatrous and super

stitious."

"Thou which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? I rely with confidence upon your candour and love of truth for an open retractation of this unsupported calumny; you will I am persuaded, exemplify the maxim of St. Francis of Sales, which you have quoted with approbation, that a good Christian is never outdone in good manners.'