Obrazy na stronie

125) nor do I assert that it compels a belief in either of these modes. But I do humbly and respectfully maintain, and I venture to think that the foregoing pages have provedThat, as the language of the Declaration does not exclude the belief which I have endeavoured to shew is also consonant with the 28th Article, so every member of the Church of England is entirely free to hold it and every Minister free to teach it, "provided" only (as I said at the outset of this Letter, p. 4) they do not thereby intentionally "involve that Doctrine which, I allege, was disavowed in the Declaration."

[ocr errors]

If it be feared, as Mr. Goode and others seem to fear, that such a belief tends to make us so localize the Presence of Christ on earth as to hinder us from raising our thoughts to Him in Heaven: if, as he tells us, (Work, p. 451) "the Fathers constantly" are "admonishing us that he who approaches to this body must have his mind aloft;' that 'we have our victim above, our priest above, our sacrifice above,' and that Christ is absent' in heaven, and only to be laid hold of by faith:"-it seems to me enough to say, That the permissive belief for which I am contending no more involves the dreaded consequence than does any belief of the Substantial Presence of the Sun in this earth of ours hinder us from that lifting of our thoughts to the Glorious Luminary as he shines above, which I suppose is an instinctive feeling of every man who sees his Light or feels his Heat. It may assist also in calming such fears, to recollect that Bp. Latimer once said (See p. 41) "We do worship Christ in the Heavens, and we do worship Him in the Sacrament."

This (I fear too-lengthened) Postscript being now completed, it is necessary to sum up the result of both it and the Letter; and this will, I think, be most conveniently done in the following Nine Propositions :—

* A lay friend noticing, after they were printed off, the following words of Robert Samuel (See p. 188) "there now making intercession, offering and giving his holy body for me, for my body, for my ransom, for my full price and satisfaction," says "might not this be italicized as expressing an important doctrine-the juge sacrificium ?"

1. That a (1) Carnal (or Capernaical) belief on the Real Presence, which it was (2) considered necessary to disperse, prevailed extensively among (3) Clergy and (4) Laity in the middle of the 16th Century.

Bp. Shaxton's Recantation Articles 1546, p. 5. (1)—Stat. Edw. vi., c. i., p. 6. (1. 2. 3. 4.)—Conversation between Cranmer and Bonner, Sep. 10, 1549, p. 6: Argument pp. 7, 9: The Lord Paget's opinion of Bp. Gardiner's Doctrine, p. 28. (1)-Articles ministered by Bp. Hooper to Will. Phelps, 1551, p. 30. (1. 2. 3.)—Conference in the Tower between Bp. Ridley and Sec. Bourn, 1553, p. 39: Disputation at Oxford, Ap. 18, 1554, p. 39: Exam. of J. Rogers, 1554-5, p. 42. (1)—Cranmer's Ans. to Gardiner, p. 181. (1. 2. 3.) Argument from Jewel v. Harding, p. 250. (1. 2. 3.)—Jewel's "Defence of the Apology." Note 264. (1. 3.)

2. That, as this belief (1) mainly though (2) not entirely resulted from the popular Doctrine of Transubstantiation so, (3) a continuous effort was made to suppress that Doctrine.

Bp. Shaxton's Recantation Articles, No. 1, p. 5 (1)-P. Martyr's Disput. at Oxford, June 11, 1549, pp. 10 to 13. (1. 3.)—1st Disputation at Cambridge, June 20, 1549: 2nd Disputation, June 24, 1549: 3rd Disputation: Bp. Ridley's Determination of them p. 18. (1. 3.)-Cranmer's Ans. to Gardiner, p. 25. (1. 3)-Bp. Hooper's Visitation Articles 1551-2, p. 30. (1. 3.)-Assertion of the Sacrament by J. Winter, Nov. 8. 1551. p. 31. (1. 3.)—Article xxix. 1552, and Argument, p. 32. (1.3.)-Argument, p. 38: Archdn. Philpot, Disp. at Lond. Oct. 18, 1553, p. 38: Examn. of J. Bradford, Jan. 29, 1554-5, p. 41: Conference between Ridley and Latimer, 1555, p. 42: Ridley's "Brief declaration of the Lord's Supper," 1555, p. 43: Cranmer's Disput. at Oxford, Ap. 16. 1555: Ridley's Disput. at Oxford, 1555, p. 52. (1)—Cranmer's Letter to Calvin on Council of Trent, March 20, 1552, p. 90: Arguments thereon, pp. 91 to 92. (1. 3.)-Knox's Objections to Kneeling, pp. 104-8. (1. 2. 3.)—Art. xxix. of 1553, and Mr. Hardwick's remarks thereon, pp. 110 and 111 (1. 3.).—Cranmer's account of opinion of Luther &c. Note p. 168. (1).—Opinion held by Cranmer and others between 1545 and 1548, pp. 275 to 278. (1. 2. 3.)-Bucer's Letter to Niger, Ap. 15, 1550. Note p. 403. (1.)

3. That, in doing this, there was no intention to deny or discourage a belief in the Real Objective Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ, in the Ministration of the Sacrament or under the Form of Bread and Wine, if such Presence was not held to be Natural or Organical.

Foxe's opinion of P. Martyr's Disputation at Oxford, June 11. 1549, p. 9.-Argument, p. 10.- Cranmer's opinion of Bertram's Doctrine, p. 20-Cranmer's Answer to Gardiner, pp. 20 to 26.— Dr. Redman's communication to R. Wilkes and Master Nowel, Nov. 1551, pp. 28, 29.-Young's Letter to Cheke concerning Dr. Redman, p. 29.-Articles against Bp. Ferrar, 1553-4, p. 37.Comparison of terms, p. 62.-Argument between Cranmer and Gardiner on the presence of the Sun, pp. 73 to 75.-Cranmer's Letter to P. Council, Oct. 7. 1552. pp. 77 to 79.-Argument thereon, pp. 79 to 84.-Foxe's Estimate of Cranmer's opinion, p. 84.-Cranmer's language as to Consecration, pp. 85 to 89.-Cranmer's Belief compared with Calvin's, Note pp. 86 to 87.-Argument from Bp. Hooper's Articles of 1551-2, p. 119.-Cranmer's language as to Presence in the Ministration, p. 125.-Cranmer's Catechism, 1548, p. 154.-Argument therefrom, pp. 155-9, and from Hom. of 1547, pp. 160 to 168.-Gardiner's opinion of P. Book of 1549, p. 173. -Cranmer's definition of Corporal p. 177; his language to Gardiner, pp. 180 to 186.-Ridley's Exam. at Oxford, Sep. 30, 1555, p. 186. -Ans. of two "husbandmen" to Bp. Bonner, May 22. 1555, p. 187.-Letter of Rob. Samuel Aug. 31, 1555, p. 188.-Jewel's controversy with Harding, pp. 267 to 269.-Reformed Primers 1545 to 1559.-Bucer's Letter to P. Martyr, June 20, 1549, Note pp. 398 to 402.-Bucer's Letter to Niger, Ap. 15. 1550. Note p. 401.-P. Martyr's "Confession of the Lord's Supper," &c., May 1556. Note p. 402.

4. That the (1) Doctrine of the Real Objective Presence was Authoritatively taught in 1549; and that (2) the same Doctrine was also Authoritatively taught during the rest of the Reign of King Edward VIth.


Letter of Duke of Somerset to Cardinal Pole, June 4, 1549, p. 7. (1)-Argument from Bp. Gardiner, p. 9. (1) - Bp. Gardiner's "Long Matter Justificatory," 1550-1, p. 26. (1) Articles exhibited by Bp. Gardiner, Jan. 21, 1550-1, p. 27 (1. 2.)-Testimony of John White, Feb. 20, 1550-1, p. 27 (1)—Argument, p. 32: Act of Uniformity, 1552: Statement of Bp. Latimer, 1554: Argument and Note p. 35. (2.)-Argument pp. 121 to 122: examination of Mr. Goode's comparison of the P. Books of 1549 and 1552, pp. 409 to 410. (1. 2.)

5. That, when (1) in 1552 objections were made to that Rubric of the new Prayer Book which enjoined Kneeling at reception of the Sacrament, (2) the Declaration explaining it was framed in conformity with the considerations advanced in these four Propositions; and that, consequently, (3) the words "real and essential" were not meant to be a denial of that Real Presence mentioned in Proposition 3.

Argument pp. 36, 73 (1. 2. 3.)—Letter of Utenhovius to Bullinger, Oct. 12, 1552, p. 93: Note in Co. Book, Oct. 20, 1552, p. 96 : Exam. of Knox by P. Council, 1553 p. 97 (1)-character of the Ld. Chancellor, Bp. Goodrick p. 98: Weston's language as to (prob.) Knox, in 1554:-Foxe's remark on Weston's words, p. 102 (1. 2.)-apparent ground of Knox's objection pp. 104 to 108.(1)Argument pp. 113 to 118 (1.2.)-Argument from Cranmer's Letter p. 119 (3.)

6. That the (1) omission of the Declaration from the Prayer Book of 1559 (though it seems to have been still in (2) some way Authoritatively used) together with (3) other Proceedings, (4) especially the Revision of the Articles, in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, is evidence of (5) a purpose then to avoid any appearance of denying that doctrine.

Bp. Burnet's account of the omission, p. 63: Collier's account, p. 64 (1. 5.)—Kneeling not left indifferent, as proposed by Guest, p. 64: refusal to Puritans to prostrate themselves, pp. 65 and 393: direction for Wafer Bread p. 65: Grindal's Dialogue, p. 66: Ælfric's Anglo-Saxon Homily, p. 68, (3. 5.)- Omission of Sec. 3, in Art. xxix. of 1552 (4.5.)-Bp. Burnet's account of revision of Art. 28: Mr. Harold Browne's opinion of it, pp. 189 to 191 (4. 5.)--Letter from Grindal &c. Feb. 6, 1566-7: Mr. Fisher's opinion of P. Book 1559 (2.3.5.)-Bp. Guest's Letter to Cecil, Dec. 22, 1566 p. 192; 2nd Letter, May 1571, pp. 195 to 204: Argument thereon, pp. 205 to 235 (3. 4. 5.)—Bp. Jewel's controversy with Harding; and Arguments thereon, pp. 235 to 250 (3. 5.)-Argument from New Ed. of Homilies and from Reformed Primer, pp. 264 to 283 (3. 5.) 7. That this recognition of the Doctrine of the

Real Presence was not withdrawn, but was supported by such Eucharistic (1) Documents and (2) Statements as were put forth by Ecclesiastical Authority, from the death of Elizabeth until the Restoration.

Bp. Overall's additions to the Catechism; Mr. Fisher's opinion of them, p. 283 to 284: Irish Articles, 1615, p. 285 (1).—Ans. of Bps at Savoy Conference, 1661, pp. 70, 307 (2).-Can. vii., 1640, p. 386 (1.)

8. That (1) the Revision of the Order of the Holy Communion in 1662, (2) the known Opinions of the Leading Reviewers, and (3) the circumstances connected with the re-insertion of the Declaration then-(4) all concur to prove a continued acceptance of that Doctrine.

Non-conformist objection to Kneeling and demand for re-insertion of Declaration, p. 70: refusal and ultimate consent of the Bishops, p. 70: change of words "real and essential" at Bp. Gunning's instigation, p. 70 probable opinion of Gawden, p. 72, (3. 4.)-Argument on Rubrics in Communion Office of 1662, p. 122 to 152, (1. 4.) -Bp. Cosin, effect of Consecration, p. 137-9, 150. (2. 4.)-Bp. Gauden's "Tears, Sighs," &c. pp. 303-5: his "Counsell... to xliv. Presbyters," &c. p. 305. (2. 4.)-Bp's. defence of Kneeling,

« PoprzedniaDalej »