THE ANGLICAN POSITION.*

Tait author of this brochure is an able and honest man who does not shrink from carrying out all his premisses to their

logical results. He writes from the point of view of a moderate Anglican Churchman, and without a shade of bitterness towards other Christian communions ; but he would have his principles carried out without any compromise,---going straight to his goal without swerving to the right hand or to left. But Mr. Bandinel forgets that it is much easier to be logical in one's study than in the world of hard facts in which theories are tested. A theory which does not stand the test

of experience, however beautiful and cogent on paper, is of little value as a guide to practice. The most accurate 'knowledge of the laws of mathematics will not enable a marksman to hit the mark if he make no allowance for the resistance of the atmosphere. On the contrary, his mathematical knowledge will mislead him if he relies on it alone. His bullet will never hit the target so long as he tries to make it traverse the distance in an abso-

lutely true parabola. Mr. Bandinel's end is good, and his logic would be faultless in a world of pure ideas ; but he does not make allowance for facts, and is therefore likely to fare as

'badly as the marksman who should fail to " sight" his gun. He believes that the Church of England is so pure and perfect a branch of the Christian Church, that it is fit to be a model on which all other branches of the Church and all the sects of Protestantism ought to reform themselves. He wishes, in -fact, the Church of England to take up in this country the position which the Church of Rome claims. From the point of view of the Papacy the Church of Rome, according to Mr. Bandinel, was quite right in perpetrating what is known as the

Papal Aggression nearly forty years ago. " Her apologists maintain that as there cannot be rival Truths or rival Gods, so there cannot be rival Churches on the same soil ; that where two bodies exist, each putting forth such claims, the one of them must be a true portion of the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic 'Church, the other a schismatical body. In this position they are perfectly right; and it must seem to an impartial looker-on altogether unaccountable that any reasonable being should entertain a doubt on the subject."

Mr. Bandinel would accordingly assume towards the Church of Rome the attitude which that Church maintains towards the rest of Christendom. In order not to misrepresent him, we will state Mr. Bandinel's position in his own words :—

"By reason of the absolute solidarity existing between the Anglo-Roman Body and the Roman Church, the schismatical acts of the Anglo-Roman Body are the acts of the Roman Church ; and the Anglo-Roman Body being in schism, the Roman Church is in schism. By reason of the acceptance by the Bishops of the Roman Communion of the dogma of Papal Infallibility, and the absolute -unification of the Churches of the Roman Obedience by the decree declaring that the Bishop of Rome is the one Bishop of the Universal Church, from whom all others derive their authority, and without whose sanction they are not Bishops at all,' they are all of them in schism. Here, there, and everywhere throughout she whole area of the Roman Obedience, the Church of England is the true Church, the true representative, that is, of the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church ; and the Churches in com- munion with the See of Rome are in schism. Standing in front of the High Altar of St. Peter's at Rome, the humblest layman of the English Church is the true Catholic, the true representative of the Universal Church founded by Christ and His Apostles ; the rope and his Cardinals are schismatics."

This being Mr. Bandinel's position, he is, of course, quite logical in recommending that the Church of England should not only

actively support the Old Catholics of Germany and other re- forming movements in the Roman communion, but should

also spontaneously invade foreign dioceses and plant rival Sees and altars as opportunities occur. Now we will put a case to Mr. Bandinel of which he will probably admit the cogency. He would allow that the Jewish Church was in its origin as divine an institution as the Christian Church. The sin of schism was then as heinous as it is now, and was on one occasion • Oar Anatiesin Position. and What it Insolves. By the Bev. James Bandinel, AC L. Ozan. London sad Oxford: Parker and Co. 1888. divinely punished in a manner of which there is no parallel in the records of Christianity. Now we have a glaring case of schism in the Jewish Church. -Under Jeroboam ten tribes revolted against their hereditary King, and set up not only a rival throne, but a rival worship in addition. Mr. Bandinel will admit that the shrines at Dan and Bethel were at least as schismatical and idolatrous as even her bitterest opponents can allege the Church of Rome to be. And there was this additional aggravation, that there was no valid priesthood in the Kingdom of Israel. Jeroboam " made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the house of Levi ;" in other words, they were not priests at all. Moreover, a prophet was specially sent by God to denounce the schismatical worship and sham priesthood set up by the new King of Israel. In short, the Kingdom of Israel was un- deniably in a worse case than even Mr. Bandinel believes the Church of Rome to be now. Yet, strange to say, we read of no attempt on the part of the ecclesiastical authorities of the Kingdom of Judah to restore the true worship and legitimate priesthood among the schismatical tribes. They left the matter in God's hands. and he chose another way. Out of the very midst of the schismatical people he raised up pro- phets to bear witness to His name and law,—prophets more illustrious by their supernatural endowments than any of the prophets of Judah. Judging by analogy, then, it seems to be God's will that when an integral portion of his Church falls away from the divine order, the remedy should be left ■• to His Providence unless there be a very clear indication to the contrary. The total lack of a valid ministry might be such an indication. Such a denial of the faith as would vitiate spiritual life might be another indication. But nobody denies to the Church of Rome the possession of a valid ministry, and even Mr. Bandinel would hardly go so far as to affirm that the Church of Rome is so committed to heresy as to bar the flow of spiritual life through her ordinances. Mr. Bandinel appeals to Catholic. precedent ; but the Catholic precedents of undivided Christendom are against him. It is certain that while Christendom was undivided, no national Church would have been allowed to act within the juris- diction of its Patriarchate as Mr. Bandinel proposes that the Church of England should act within the jurisdiction of the Roman communion.

But the plain truth is that ancient precedents have in some important respects ceased to be applicable to the Christendom of our day. They do not fit the facts. We have to deal with a state of things which was unknown before the separation of East and West. Such a tribunal of final appeal as was pro- vided by the old system of (Ecumenical Councils is now impossible, and each branch of the Church must make the best of its circumstances. The old law as to schism cannot be enforced. Candid observers cannot close their eyes to the fact that the Spirit of God is now, as in the schismatical and idolatrous Kingdom of Israel, energising through irregular channels. Mr. Bandinel holds rigidly that Episcopacy is of the essence of the Christian ministry ; but he evidently recognises the vast amount of real Christian work whi.ch is done through Nonconformist channels, and he advocates co- operation with Nonconformists in everything that involves no infringement of his own principles. But he admits that Rome, with all the errors that he charges against her, does possess a valid ministry, and administers true sacraments, mutilated as he may deem the Holy Communion in the Roman communion to be. Yet because he holds that the Church of Rome is guilty of schism in England, and has practically absorbed the Episcopate into the Papacy, he would absolutely un- church the whole Latin communion, and arrogate to the Church of England the prerogative of being the sole true Church of Western Christendom, France, Italy, Austria, and Spain being regarded as partes infidelium, waiting to be converted by the English Church. Surely Mr. Bandinel will, on reflection, see the extravagance, to use no harsher word, of his proposal. That the Church of Rome deals in that way with the rest of Christendom ought not to be considered by an English Churchman a conclusive argument in favour of such a policy. Has it answered in the Church of Rome? Facts refute it. He must be a purblind Roman Catholic who fails to see the evidence of fill and energetic Catholic life outside the Roman Obedience, both in the East and West. Con- sidering the inevitable tendency of all organic life to decom- pose and perish when severed from its source, it is impossible

to explain the continued existence of Christianity for so many centuries outside the jurisdiction of the Pope, with all the notes of a vigorous Church life, on the theory that the Pope is the head of the Universal Church, and that union with him is consequently a vital condition of Churchmansbip. Sensible Roman Catholics must admit that there is a fatal flaw in the theory, or that all the fruits of Christianity may exist and be propagated abundantly and indefinitely to the end of time apart from the Catholic Church. For a life which has lasted through so many centuries, and still shows no sign of decay, may last as long as Christianity.

That English Churchmen should show sympathy towards the Old Catholics of Germany, and towards any reforming movement within the Roman Church, is natural enough. But that is a very different thing from the drastic policy which Mr. Bandinel recommends. He forgets the raison cram of the Old Catholic movement. It has nothing in common with his suggestions. The Old Catholics did not, and, as far as we know, do not propose, as Mr. Bandinel does, to excommunicate the whole Roman communion. Regarding the excommunica- tion of all who could not accept the Vatican dogma as unjust, they offered the benefit of Christian ministrations to those who were, as they believed, unrighteously deprived of them. But they disclaimed all intention of establishing an aggressive propagandism against the Church of Rome. On the contrary, they advised Roman Catholics who could not accept Vaticanism to remain in their Church so long as they were not excommuni- cated. They encouraged reform as a leaven within the Church, rather than a crusade against it from without. Such certainly was and is the attitude of Dr. Dollinger towards the Roman communion. And it is the true and wise, as well as the charitable attitude. The inevitable effect of Mr. Bandinel's policy would be to frustrate all efforts at reform within the Roman Church, by uniting all her members against a Reforma- tion which started from the monstrous premiss that the Church of Rome had ceased absolutely to be a part of the Catholic Church, and is, in fact, a dead body.

Mr. Bandinel is equally uncompromising on the question of Disestablishment. He is very indignant with those who would treat it as "an open question." "This is wholly at variance," he thinks, "with the traditional teaching of the Church, and in direct contradiction to that of the Prophet Malachi, who accused the Jews of his day of robbing God, in that they withheld from Him `tithes and offerings." We do not admit that the traditional teaching of the Church on this subject is what Mr. Bandinel represents it to be; and the quotation from Malachi does not touch the question of Dis- establishment at all. If it be a duty to pay tithes and offerings in the service of religion, that duty is entirely unaffected by the relation in which the Church stands to the State. We are opposed to Disestablishment ; but the Establishment is, after all, only what logicians call a separable accident. It is not a matter which can be decided on abstract grounds : it is good or bad, useful or mischievous, according to circumstances. We believe that its advantages to the nation at present are enormously in excess of its disadvantages, and we defend it accordingly. But we can easily conceive circumstances in which we should think it a duty to advocate Disestablishment, even in the interest of the Church.

We have dealt thus fully with Mr. Bandinel because he has given concise expression to thoughts which are now prevalent among a considerable number of Churchmen, and which appear to us mischievous and untenable. The Church of England has a great position, and may yet play an important part in healing the divisions of Christendom. But this she can only do by strict adherence to the policy she has hitherto pursued,—the policy of non-intervention in the affairs of foreign Churches.