66 66 statements close this excellent treatise, and form the subject of its tenth section. And yet whilst we apply epithets of sincere praise upon the volume under review, there are parts of it from which we feel ourselves compelled to withhold our "Imprimatur." The contemptuous, sarcastic, violent, and illiberal manner in which the author permits himself to speak of High Churchmen, when he stamps them as bigots" of "vulgar and malignant spirits," attached to a venomous superstition," to whom "reason is not to be addressed," and whose doctrines can be received only by such as have "forced upon themselves a temporary insanity,”—is worthy of unsparing castigation! And we assume the province of telling our author that he is guilty of a grievous misrepresentation of the facts, when he says, in utter ignorance of the real state of the case, that rural pulpits ring, Sunday after Sunday, with pernicious bigotry upon the sin of schism, and the necessity of church communion, as a means of frightening common people from the meeting-house." (P. 407.) 66 It might indeed seem altogether frivolous to advert seriously to extravagancies of this sort, if it were not very true that they pervade the Church, and, under different forms and pretexts, infect the clerical order to a degree that involves the Establishment in an extreme danger. Church Reform may help us, but the Church must look well to herself, and purge out thoroughly the old leaven of popish intolerance, or no reform will save her. Let the common people, throughout the country, hear Methodists and Dissenters spoken of from the pulpit, frequently and freely, as christian brethren: not a hat the less would be doffed in the porch on a Sunday: on the contrary, so much frank truth and charity, uttered by the Clergy, would immensely benefit the Church at the present crisis. Pp. 406, 407. pre Upon this statement we would make but two remarks; first, that the fact charged is not true, for if there be any one subject upon which the Clergy have maintained a culpable and mischievous silence, it is cisely this very subject of the sin of schism; and secondly, that the minister, who neglects to inculcate the necessity of church communion, suppresses an important gospel doctrine, for which omission he will have to answer at the bar of Christ! It is not for man to alter the conditions of salvation! Is there, we ask, such a sin as schism? If there be, (and unquestionably there is,) such a sin as schism, the preachers of God's word must denounce it, at whatever hazard of being stigmatized, by the writer before us, as being guilty of "insensate intolerance," and " preposterous bigotry," and "revolting uncharitable If his puling cant, his whining declamation, about charity, and love, and liberality, be worth any thing as an argument against denunciations of any one sin, it is available against every denunciation of every sin, be it what it may, and the ministers of God's word must forbear to mention " hell to ears polite." But of this enough: our author concludes his essay with the all engrossing topic of Church Reform. In connexion with which, he says, there are three questions of practical significance. The first is-Can the Church, with safety, be touched at all in the way of reform?--the second is this, Is the present position of the Church such, that the Clergy have much to lose, and little to hope for, from the changes that are likely to be effected, or the reverse? and the third, Shall these changes, if indeed they are to be effected, be thrown upon the discretion of the laity, or be guided and governed by the ministers of religion, ingenuously giving their hearts and talents to the work?-Pp. 415, 416. The first of these queries is superseded by the advance of public opinion, and the avowed intention of public men of all parties. The Church will be touched at all hazards! The second of the abovenamed questions our author answers by assuring us that Church Reform, carried in opposition to "clerical obduracy, would leave to the Clergy a miserable prospect of progressive humiliations." As to the third question, who shall guide and govern Church Reform, our author replies, WITH THE CLERGY IT NOW RESTS TO SAVE THEIR ORDER, AND OUR EPISCOPAL, LITURGICAL, AND ENDOWED CHURCH!!!-P. 418. This advice would command the most respectful consideration, but that it is liable, in limine, to one trifling difficulty, viz. that under existing circumstances it is utterly impracticable. The Clergy have not the power, however ardently they may wish, to accomplish ecclesiastical reform ! "The English Church is now, in almost every sense, destitute of authority, and lies at the mercy of her foes,-and of her friends. To be qualified to exert a more general and beneficial influence, the Church must breathe with her own lungs, speak with her own mouth, and show the energy of a pulse and a heart-her own. Is this, under existing circumstances, and opinions, and feelings, practicable? We fear not! But we would not abjectly despair; and, therefore, as a preliminary measure, necessary to the independence of the Church, we would again implore our governors to re-open the doors of Convocation, which have been so long and so injuriously closed. We strongly recommend this eloquent volume. All men of all parties may reap much wisdom from its pages. To its learned author we would assign the place amongst theologians which Mr. Hallam has vindicated to himself amongst historians, and call him the most impartial of controvertists. ART. II.-The Anglo-Saxon Church: its History," Revenues, and General Character. By HENRY SOAMES, M. A. Author of the "History of the Reformation." London: Parker. 1835. Pp. xxxv. 316. Ir is with unfeigned pleasure that we once more introduce the indefatigable historian of the Reformation to the notice of our readers, and this pleasure partly arises from the fulfilment of our early prediction, that Mr. Soames would be classed among our established historians. The work before us is a valuable addition to the inquiry into the doctrines of the Anglo-Saxon Church, pursued by our author in his Bampton Lectures, and furnishes a perplexing answer to the Romanist, who arrogantly asks where the Church of England was before the days of Luther. When it was clearly proved that the doctrines of the AngloSaxon Church differed in important points from those held by the Church of Rome,† it was desirable that the natural inference should not be left questionable, but that the polity of the Anglo-Saxon Church should be vindicated from the suspicion of being in any respect subject to the usurping power of the Vatican. This has been most ably accomplished in the pages on our table, and while they afford abundant information to the general reader, furnish a valuable clew to assist the researches of the theological antiquary. In our notice of the first volumes of the History of the Reformation, we observed that we had never met with the same extent of information, and such rich fruits of learned and laborious research, as those volumes afforded and that the references to authorities were superior to those contained in any former publication. The History of the Anglo-Saxon Church fully maintains the credit, in this respect, which the History of the Reformation obtained. There cannot be a more interesting subject of inquiry presented to the mind of an Englishman, than that which the early history of his country's religion affords; and while we trace it back to those gloomy days when darkness overspread the land, and endeavour to ascertain whose were" the beautiful feet" that first brought the doctrines of salvation to our benighted shores, we cannot fail experiencing an increase of gratitude for mercies which the bountiful hand of a special Providence has showered upon us. A work enabling us to do this, is at all times valuable, but is especially so at a period when an unhallowed confederacy of Romanists, Dissenters, and Infidels, is seeking the destruction of our Established Religion. Mr. Soames plainly shews that the reformation of our Church was only a return to the doctrines and discipline of an early Church. He observes in his preface, • See CHRISTIAN REMEMBRANCER for July, 1827. That the Reformation did not make any change in our Church's orthodoxy. It was one of Theodore's earliest cares to settle a national establishment upon the principle of assent to the first four General Councils; exactly the same base was laid by the Reformers. At Calcuith, this base was somewhat widened; assent being then given to the first six General Councils. But Elfric subsequently shews, that this extension was not viewed as interfering with Theodore's original principle: it was not, in fact, material; it was little more than a fuller admission of those doctrines, which have been pronounced orthodox by the consent of ages.-Pref. pp. xxix. xxx. Now this is a point of the utmost importance, because it at once shews the invalidity of the Romanists' claims to our endowments, whether ecclesiastical or collegiate; and the fallacy of the Dissenters' argument, that because our endowments have been transferred from their original proprietors, they may therefore be again transferred. It has long been a matter of dispute who first brought the doctrines of Christianity to our island, and it will, perhaps, never be cleared up. But it is universally admitted that Britain was christianised at a very early period. After alluding to the inferences to be drawn from the writings of Justin Martyr and Irenæus, our author adds All doubt, however, upon the early conversion of our island, is removed by the testimony of Tertullian. He speaks of British districts inaccessible to Roman arms, but subdued by Christ. Had not the faith of Jesus obtained considerable notice in more polished quarters of the island, it would hardly have won a way into its remoter regions. Tertullian's authority, therefore, establishes abundantly, that when the second century closed, Christianity was far from a novelty among the tribes of Britain.-P. 2. The fact of Britain being thus early converted, renders it highly probable that this was effected by some of the Apostles; and of these, the greatest probability attaches itself to St. Paul, whom Clement of Rome affirms to have preached as far as the utmost bounds of the west. Britain being usually considered as thus situated, affords the probability of a visit from the Apostle of the Gentiles. Indeed, in the sixth century, it was positively asserted that St. Paul preached in Britain. Without stopping to inquire into the various statements which have been made with regard to Joseph of Arimathea, and others who flourished in the apostolic age, we may rest assured that Christianity was introduced into Britain previous to the days of Tertullian, and that this country furnished victims to allay the bloody thirst of Diocletian; for during the persecution which has rendered the name of that emperor infamous, Alban of Verulam, amongst others, was added to "the noble army of martyrs." After ascertaining the probable period when a branch of the Holy Catholic Church was planted in this island, it is important to prove what the form of church government was. Now it is most evident that Episcopacy was the form of church government in the early ages of our Church, as well as in those of every other Christian Church; British Bishops having attended the Council which was held at Sardis, in 347. But although an Episcopal Church was thus early established, it was doomed to undergo the same vicissitudes as those which befel the Britons; for the struggles which took place between the natives and the Saxons terminating in the success of the pagan warriors, the Church was despoiled, and religion was driven, with its professors, into the remote and inaccessible parts of the island. It is from the period on which we are about to enter, that the history of the Anglo-Saxon Church must be dated. But it is of importance to bear in mind, that Augustin was not the first bearer of glad tidings to this nation. Mr. Soames' arrangement may be best described in his own words: Anglo-Saxon Ecclesiastical History admits of an advantageous distribution into four several portions. The first exhibits a nation passing from paganism to Christianity, and a foreign church struggling for ascendency over one of native growth. The second embraces a period in which ancient England made her most conspicuous intellectual progress, and in which were laid securely the foundations of an ecclesiastical establishment. The third is rendered interesting by the splendid services of Alfred, but it paints an age of national distress, and of literary declension. The fourth is also deeply marked by civil difficulties, and prevailing ignorance. Dunstan has, however, given it a peculiar character, by planting the Benedictine system among Englishmen.— Pp. 19, 20. For more than a century after the Saxons had seated themselves in Britain, the country was continually harassed with the miseries of intestine wars, and paganism prevailed over Christianity. But at length Providence was pleased to effect a change, and means were provided for the re-establishment of Christianity. In the year 560 according to the Saxon Chronicle, or six years later according to other authorities, Ethelbert ascended the throne of Kent, and under the title of Bretwalda, had an admitted precedence among the other monarchs of the Heptarchy. Ethelbert married Bertha, a daughter of Ohenbert, king of the Franks; and this princess having been educated in the christian religion, a stipulation was entered into at her marriage, for the free profession of it. She was accordingly attended by a Frankish Bishop, and for her accommodation, a British Church, erected in honour of St. Martin, at Canterbury, but long desecrated, was again rendered fit for the performance of divine service. It was during the reign of Ethelbert that Augustin arrived in England; and the circumstances which led to his mission are said to be as follows, according to the Homily on the birth-day of St. Gregory : While yet a private Clergyman, Gregory was one day passing through the slave-market of his native city, when his eye was forcibly arrested by some light-haired, fair-complexioned youths, who stood exposed for sale. "Whence come these lads?" he asked. "From Britain;" was the answer. "Are the |