ARCHDEACON WILBERFORCE ON CHURCH A U T HO RIT Y. *
This is a very able work; displaying extensive and well-digested knowledge, closely and clearly presented. Its logic, however, has more of the advocate- than the judge, being rather onesided than comprehensive. Perhaps the logic, too, is more dexterous than altogether befits an English divine. It strikes us that impressions will be left on the mind of the reader which the premises would not strictly support, or at least which admit of another than the obvious conclusion when all the terms are brought into considera- tion.
The volume contains two Sermons preached before the 'University of Oxford, and a Sketch of the History of Erastianism ; each pro- duction prompted by the present state of Church affairs, as brought to a climax in the Gorham case. The first sermon, on Church Or- dinances, is founded on a tenet as old as Augustin, that natural or Adamite sin is the privation of grace bestowed at the creation and lost at the fall. This sin does not consist in action but negation ; which negation is removed by baptismal grace, leaving the indi- vidual accountable for the sins he actually commits, but rendering his nature acceptable to God, until he by deadly sins or lapses provokes the Divine displeasure. From this premise the conclu- sion to the extreme High Church view of baptism is plain enough. The sermon on the principle of Church Authority is founded on an ingenious use of the metaphysics of the schoolmen. As logic can add nothing to our mental stores, but merely arranges them,— and as there are certain instinctive principles in the mind not at- tained by observation, and superior to reason, which each indivi- dual affirms from himself, the sole test being the general judgment of mankind,—so in religion (or the supernatural as opposed to the natural) the true doctrine will not be elicited by logic or by learn- ing, but some primal power superior to both, which in this case resides in the Bishops of the Church, immediately prompted by the Holy Spirit.
" Subjects of the deepest importance were agitated in the early ages of the Gospel—subjects which affected those mysteries of the faith which are the first object of Christian instruction. How were these disputes determined ? They were concluded by the authority of those who by office were suc- cessors of the Apostles. The claim was built upon our Lord's pro- mise, that He would be with His disciples even to the end of the world. This was understood to be spoken not only to the holy Apostles, but also to their successors the Bishops of the Church Catholic; who formed the con- necting links of the whole Christian body, and in their collective capacity re- presented their Lord's presence even to the end of time. His guiding, grace, the living principle of His mystic body, which had first dwelt in fulness in His Apostles as a gift of inspiration, was understood to dwell as a gift of in- terpretation in the collective episcopate. This was a point on which the an- cient Church was as well qualified to give evidence as any other on which its verdict is accepted. Do we accept its judgment that the Epistle to the Hebrews, or the Revelation of St. John, should be admitted into the sacred canon ; and can we deny the verdict, which it had previously pronounced, that the most sacred doctrines were to be understood according to that view of truth into which the Holy Ghost guided its collective Fathers? "
* *
"Allowing, in the fullest manner, that Scripture is the rule of faith, the- question remains, by whom Scripture is to be interpreted ? Are we to refer to the individual, or the collective mind ? Is one the judge or the other ? Authorities are cited both by judges and advocates : in which character does. the Church act when she refers to Scripture ? A judge declares on authority his interpretation of the law; an advocate attempts to gain acceptance for his interpretation of it by argument. But the Church produces no argu- ments. She does not even refer, like the Westminster Assembly, to those. texts which substantiate her positions. She gives judgment that her creed is to be accepted as conformable to the will of God. It has been disputed whether Aristotle believed in the principle of a moral sense. Why, it is said has he not more plainly affirmed it in his treatises on Ethics ? It would have been superfluous to do so, because his works assume such a principle, as much as a work on grammar the existence of language. And it was needless, for the Church to claim that interpretive office, which, by the fact of giving judgment, she actually exerts."
The Sketch of the History of Erastianism partakes of the same High Church (not to say Romanist) views as the Sermons ; but, treating upon a lay subject, and rather in the manner of exposition. than argument, the principles are not so broadly stated. In his Sketch, the author begins with the Reformation, and the changes in opinion and practice that flowed from that event as regards the self-inherent rights of the Church. In countries where Presbyter- ianism prevailed, all interference with doctrine on the part of the- State was expressly repudiated. Where Episcopacy, in name or in fact, was established, various theories arose respecting the con- nexion of Church and State ; or rather, the State gradually exer- cised a control over the Church, and theories were invented to ac- count for or defend the practice. Thus it was held, successively, that the Prince was the head of the Church, 1. by Divine ap- pointment, 2. by natural law, 3. by a fiction analogous to the "civil compact" of Locke and the Whigs, in which he was feigned to represent the whole body of the Christians, who in the primitive ages bore a conspicuous part in the Church. With the first view was mixed up some refined metaphysical specu- lations touching the manner in which the Prince's rights were ex- ercised through the Bishops. These theories were followed by, secondly, the principle of Erastus, who taught that " the civil magistrate has not only a peculiar commission as being invested by Divine appointment with a place in the Church's administration, (which the Episcopal system was ready to allow,) but that he pos- sesses this power by inherent authority, whether he be a Christian, • A Sketch of the History of Erastianism; together with two Sermons on the Reality of Church Ordinances, and on the Principle of Church Authority. By Ro- bert Isaac Wilberforce, A.M., Archdeacon of the East Riding. Published by Murray.
or aot ; and further, that he is not bound to refer to the Church as directed by supernatnral guidance in the discovery of truth" The third doctrine, broached by Pfaff in opposition to Erastianism, and called the Consistorial System, started the idea that the Prince represented the whole people, and, " as the first member of the Church, had been allowed by its inferior members to exercise that authority which belonged to them in common." Perhaps neither of these theories was ever nakedly advanced by the State as a ground of action ; but they no doubt had their influences upon its conduct, as well as upon public opinion. In Germany, where they all originated, theyhave finally, necording to the Arch- deacon, ended in Rationalism: in England, they have produced ideas upon which Father Newman touched in his Lectures to the Tractarians—" Shall not a free-born Briton be at liberty to choose his own religion ?"
"How does it happen that the English people acquiesce so readily in such an interference with the rights of consewnee ? Because, simultaneously with the introduction of the territorial system, other changes have been going on, which have in a measure neutralized its effect. The assertion of the unfettered liberty of individual belief has made many persons indifferent through what means the Church expresses her j ent. If they felt bound in.conscience to respect her decisions, it would -be of some moment by whom they were made; but why should men feel anxious about the decisions of a judge in whom they recognize no authority ? Again, the power which was formerly vested in the 'person of the Sovereign is now held in common among the King and theEstates of the -realm, and is exercised practically by the Minister whole's the madame of the representatives of the people. While the determination of doctrine rests nominally therefore with the Sovereign, it depends really upon the popular opinion of the day. And this is exactly that arrangement which Pfaff suggested as accounting for the state ef things in Germany; and which he called the consistorial system. So that while the forms-of the territorial system have remained, we have passed in reality to that other order of things, which has been shown to be so inti- mately allied with Rationalism. The world in general, however, feels little repugnance at leaving the decision of religious questions to the sovereign power, because the sovereign power is virtually their noble selves.' The decision in Church matters on late occasions has avowedly been less in- fluenced by the strict.rules of law, than by a reference to public opinion; and thus the formal Erastianism of our position is made tolerable by that virtual deference to the public sentiment, which is the essentiaLfeature of the consistorial system. "And yet, it may be said, the adoption of these principles has not led to that open infidelity which predominates in Germany. The more practical tendency of the English mind, not to mention other circumstances, may have kept us, by God's blessing, from such delusions. But Erastianism and Redone ;=km are in reality only two forms of the selfsame error—a denial of the existence of any Divine rule in the interpretation of religious truth. Take away the true principle of guidance, and a literary and speculative people will tend towards Rationalism; while a nation which is inclined to political combinations, and jealous in its maintenance of public order, will shape its public opinion into a guide for itself. Crude and chimerical no- tions will be more abundant in the first, but the second will be no less in dangerof sinking into a cold and presumptuous confidence in its -worldly wis- dom. Thus does 'Christianity cease to be regarded as an historical system delivered down to us by our Torsi and his holy Apostles, and it is suppose that the nation law invented a religion for itself, and delegated teachers on its own authority ; that it 'has sanctioned such sacred books as approve themselves to its own judgment, and such doctrines as are suitable to its habits and tastes. Now this is the very principle of Rationalism, and is not more false and -dangerous when it misleads an individual, than when it af- fects a nation. Its necessary effect will be to lower things sacred to an earthly standard, and to set up the national good sense as an adequate cri- terion of the mysteries of faith. And there are two signal evils which this system has already introduced among ourselves, and which, if not corrected, may be the parents of innumerable others. The want of a sufficient stand- ard of doctrine leaves the laity without guidance : the inconsistency of their engagements isa burden ..on the consciences of the clergy. Both of these are great evils; to say no g of those graver charges, which affect the Catholicity of the Church itself, and lead men to question whether her very" earomiseion be not eompromised."
Into the religious arguments connected with the book of Arch- deacon Wilberforce we cannot enter here. The connexion of Church and State is a more open question, and may be considered on two grounds,—the logical or reasonable • and the Church's claims to " supernatural guidance." On logical grounds, the inde- pendence of the Church must be conceded from the nature of the case. Faith being a purely mental operation, it is one over which the State has no more proper control than over metaphysics, or phy- sical philosophy, or grammar, or rhetoric. But this decision rests on the nature of religion, not upon its truth. It applies as much to Buddhism as to Christianity. As soon, however, as the element of property is introduced, the province of the State commences ; and if any person complains of being deprived of his rights by any act professing to be religious, then the State moves, not to inquire into religions truth, but to see that the deprivation, or whatever the form of grievance may be, has taken place at the instance of the proper persons; a court, in matters beyond its jurisdiction, assum- ing that what is done by the right authorities has been done rightly. But when a religion connects itself with the State, and obtains by means of the State, power, precedence, place, profit, and credit, then, as we lately observed, in noticing Mr. Palin's Church His- tory, the State has plausible grounds for interfering, and most assuredly will interfere. So far as these• arguments go, they are equally applicable to a church that bases its power on its Divine Origin and the constant presence of Divine inspiration. As long as it derives its .means from voluntary gifts, it is independent, and has a right to be so : as soon as it acquires preperty and establishes trust endowments, the laws must settle its pecuniary disputes : when it condescends to derive titles and temporalities from the-State, so soon will the State expect to have a power and control over it. "Whose image and whose superscription is this ?" is a question that will meet even the divinely constituted Claimant of wealth and honours, at every turn. Beyond the immediate circle of believers, the High Church demand of inde- pendence on account of solely possessing Divine truth, is less likely to succeed than the mere logical claim for freedom. That is opposed by 'nothing but practical difficulties ; the ground -cif Archdeacon Wilberforce will be denied in limine. Fn11y one half of his own communion will repudiate the truth ‘of this,
all persons beyond the pale will follow their example, and many take the very claim itself as an affront. It is fair to observe that the Archdeacon sees this difficulty, and seems prepared to meet it by the sacrifice of the temporalities, and the tangible honours of the Church. This passage closes the treatise on Erastianism.
"What into be the remedy for that mass of contradictions and inconsis- tencies of which the change has bean productive ? There can plainly be no remedy but to alter our principles to our practice, or our practice to our principles. Shall the principle of the Church of England be altered? This will hardly be desired by its attached and believing members. And yet it may be and that in the Tpresentday, when so many persons in the nation are professedly hostile to the Church, any change in her practice may endanger the safety of her possessions. When the form of Government is popular, there can be no security, it may be thought, for the Church, unless it reflects all the phases of the national will. And a body which did not possess inconsistent and jarring elements could not harmonize with a nation in which such various opinions are predominant. So that to render the Church more homogeneous would be to deprive it of that peculiar characteristic which induces the nation to ,acquiesce in its dignity and its wealth. Its Erastianism, men may say, is the very secret of its .po- pularity ; and since the nation contains incongruous elements, so must its ecclesiastical establishment. But such arguments will never be accepted-by those who believe in the sacredness of truth, and recognize the authority of God. 'Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment ?' The Church may be rich without worldly. ,wealth, and its members reve- renced without worldly titles, butif it abandons that creed which was com- mitted to its trust, or those sacraments which it wasamhodied to-minister, it will neither secure man's respect nor God's favour."
Previous page
