In the aspiration after Christian Unity, we had forgotten our editorial labours; and yet we trust that they have been directed to that glorious end, and that we have never forgotten it when employed in the less pleasant part of controversy. In thanking our readers for increased support, as well as our contributors for their labours, we would ask of all, prayer, earnest and unwearying, that, in the work of laying bare mischievous errors, we may ever manifest the spirit of meekness, and may make prominent the positive truth of the Gospel in these difficult times with simplicity and faithfulness. THE CHRISTIAN'S MONTHLY MAGAZINE. ANGLO-CATHOLICISM. "A Short Treatise on the Theory of the English Church: with Remarks on its Peculiarities; the Objections of Romanists and Dissenters; its Practical Defects; its Present Position; its Future Prospects; and the Duties of its Members." By W. Gresley, M.A., Prebendary of Lichfield. London: Burns. 1844. We are afraid that our readers will know too much of the book before us, when they have read the title; for if they expect any one of its many pretensions to be realised, they will be grievously disappointed. At least, we have been rather at a loss to find any point satisfactorily and solidly discussed: but, perchance, the fault was in ourselves, in that we expected too much of the clerical writer of religious tales. "The Great Novelist" was no adept at writing a history; and tradition tells us that his first MS. of Napoleon's Life fell a victim to the fire upon his hearth and we presume that it originated in no want of power in Scott, but from the bias which custom had made a second nature in him, by which facts were coloured into romance, to suit the taste of his readers. We hope our readers will forgive us for comparing "The Great Unknown" to the Divine of Lichfield; nor will we venture to presume that this effort of Mr. Gresley's can be a correction of previous labours: no, we will honestly conclude, that a mind biassed by its own fiction can only in rare instances overcome its self sought and injurious influences. We looked for moderation, and in its place we find misrepre : sentation, which originates either from the fact that the author was unable to grasp and understand any principles but his own, or in a cause less excusable; we mean a careless disregard of the avowed opinions of his opponents. There is also a tolerable interspersion of a sort of religious scandal, which is not less injurious, from its very absurdity. For instance, his opponents are recommended to yield to certain prejudices of Mr. Gresley's party, and he writes-" We do not like to see you "lounging with your elbows on the Holy Table, or shaking hands with "each other within the altar rails, before the communicants have risen "from their knees.' In the first place, it is a manifest absurdity to accuse the clergy of so acting; for there could be no occasion to shake hands after communion, when they had met so often before in the vestry or elsewhere on the same day and again, why should the clergy have risen from their knees before those without the rails? It is a fair specimen of the character of the mind of our author, and it is also a compliment to the opponents of so-called Anglo-Catholicism, that such palpable absurdities are produced against them. A true combatant will never rest content with puffing powder in a man's eyes when he has the real implements of opposition, and it is only charitable to the judgement of the writer to believe that he has made at least a fair selection of his objections to our manners. But, even supposing this scene to have been acted in a church, why is such religious gossip to figure in a volume which bears the name of Anglo-Catholicism, and lays claim to a spirit of reverence and moderation? We fear that Mr. Gresley has in this case mistaken himself; for if his eyes witnessed the scene once, why did he not content himself with an honest and peaceful expostulation in private rather than risk his character, by falsely charging the fault as universal which belongs to an individual? But, if, on the other hand, our author has availed himself of current report, he dishonours the name of his book, by making it the channel of such miserable matters, which is no way to heal wounds, but rather opens endless recriminations; and neither edifies the Christian, nor aids truthfulness. We are, however, inclined to believe that the Prebendary has borrowed it from the same source as his previous writings, and owes it to his imagination; and therefore recommend for the future, that instances of general charges against men as devoted to the cause of the Church as himself, should savour more of probability, or even possibility, than the one before us. * P. 248. To return to the earlier chapters will almost be a work of supererogation, as we only find an outline of what the writer believes to be our ground against Romanists and Dissenters; but under which head Mr. Ward and his party are to be classed, "deponent saith not;” and we can sympathise in this point; for it appears that there is so much of the errors of each extreme in that unhappy sect, that the arguments against each error are also applicable to them. The chapters are, indeed, perfectly innocuous with all parties, and are simply the individual, unauthorised, private judgement of a man who quietly identifies himself with perfect orthodoxy, and bestows the requisite number of attacks and laments upon all who differ. We, too, hold that the Church of England maintains an equitable moderation, and we follow what we believe her via media between erroneous systems, of which we have no hesitation in saying that the work before us supplies one example; and we trust that we shall be excused for characterising the book as a system, although we must confess that its chief claims upon the name are drawn from the headings of the chapters. We believe that the admirers, as well as opponents, of its author, are equally disappointed in his production; but it may serve as an accompaniment to its predecessors from the same pen, which have much more in common with it than its mere size. There are, indeed, to be found some unsupported hints which may serve to alter generally received facts of our ecclesiastical history; but beyond this there is little which calls for the critic's notice. Among those to which we allude may be classed the assertions, that Augustine "received "his orders from the Gallican Church,"* and also "returned to France "for the purpose of receiving consecration."† Our readers may consult history upon these and similar subjects, in which we imagine Mr. Gresley and authorities are at variance. The exponent of Anglo-Catholicism does not, however, profess in this work an extensive acquaintance with antiquity, and let us therefore try him by his own pretensions: "In the present position of the Church," says he, "it seemed to me desirable to set down, in a clear and succinct manner, what are the views entertained by those who believe themselves "to be consistent advocates of the principles and practices of the Church "of England; and to bring together, in their relative bearing to each "other, those topics on which, especially, it is necessary for Churchmen, "of all classes in society, to be informed." Here is the professed object of the book before us, and the writer claims to speak as the representative of those who are consistent Churchmen. Now, is not Mr. Gresley aware that there are thousands of his clerical brethren who differ from him, and yet believe themselves consistent and faithful members of our Church? What, then, is meant by the assumption in the preface? In its plain meaning it is obviously untrue; for very few of the number of those who believe themselves consistent Churchmen will follow Mr. Gresley's teaching. We forbear expressing our opinion upon this grievous error; but it is not, be it observed, an accident or an oversight; for Mr. Gresley acts upon the same presumption in his classification of parties in the Church. He identifies himself with the Church party, and is pleased to call the one opposed to him the Evangelical or Conventicle system. We mention this simply as a specimen of the way which our offshoots of Tractarianism can delude themselves into the idea that they are the main trunk of the noble tree: but we had much rather read the plain and simple fact, that the Anglo-Catholicism meant by our author is Tractarianism stunted in its growth; or Tractarianism in men who have not the vigour of mind which qualifies persons to follow a system with which they commence. Our readers are fully aware of the fact that Mr. Gresley's writings have been a pioneer for Tractarianism in weaker minds, and have found a place among the frivolous, and many of those who will endure religion in a romance, but who abjure it in their own lives. Why, then, is it that we find in the little book before us no confession of genuine Newmanism but from this cause-that some few individuals have deflected from the onward path which leads towards Rome, and are in an anomalous position? In this, consequently, originates the want of meaning of which we complain, and that indefinite assumption which rather befits an authoritative teacher than a writer for the people. It is not enough for a writer to say that he stands half way between schism and idolatry; for our sad experience teaches us that it is a something definite alone which can satisfy the restless cravings which the Tractarian fallacies have excited. The "Tracts for the Times," and the various publications of the party, have unsettled, until it is an undeniable fact that those who have been led on by Mr. Newman and the British Critic, are men with no fixed plan, but waverers, who fluctuate between Rome and their duty. Mr. Gresley may rest assured that his effusion will not dam up the torrent, nor even lessen one iota of its force; for, unless he can bring forward something tangible, noble, and positive, Rome has too many ties upon her former allies. Neither Mr. Palmer's pamphlet, ingenious as it was, nor the work under notice, can be of any service with one who is vacillating. The doctrine of the Apostolical Succession is no point of superiority for us to claim over Rome |