NOTICES OF BOOKS.

THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND a Portion of Christ's One Holy Catholic Church, and a Means of restoring Visible Unity. AN EIRENICON, in a Letter to the Author of The Christian Year." By E. B. PUSEY, D. D., Regius Professor of Hebrew, and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. Fifth thousand. London: 1865. Parkers & Rivingtons. 8vo., pp. 409. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 1866. Aside from the high position which Dr. Pusey fills in the English Church, as a man of profound learning, of earnest piety, and as the acknowledged representative of a large and increasing number of Churchmen, several things have contributed to fasten upon this his latest work no small share of attention, and it has been the occasion of no little excitement, which, as we write, has not yet subsided. The Eirenicon," in a Letter to Dr. Keble, was called forth as a reply to "Archbishop" Manning's Letter to Dr. Pusey. In this Letter, Dr. Manning had repeated several of the stereotyped charges against the English Church; for (1) "its denials of truths which, he says, it has rejected;" (2) for "detaching the truths which it has received from the divine voice of the Church;" and (3) for "denying the perpetual and ever-present assistance of the Holy Spirit, whereby the Church, in every age, is not only preserved from error, but enabled to declare the truth." These general charges against the English Church, Dr. Manning particularizes and applies, with the shrewdness of a man. who knows every fibre and throbbing of the English heart, and with that power of language of which he is an acknowledged master.

66

To this attack, Dr. Pusey was advised to reply, and the result is the volume before us. It is of course impossible for us, here and now, to give any account of the manner in which Dr. Pusey has done his work. But he has placed himself, in dealing with such an antagonist, on what may be called the Catholic side of his subject, and has sought to vindicate the Catholicity of the English Church in her Faith, Sacraments, and Articles. Without criticising his method in this line of argument, or estimating the measure of his success, we observe, that be then proceeds to carry the war into the enemy's camp. And here we do not hesitate to say, that a more complete exposition of the fallacy of several of the dogmas of modern Romanism, has not been made in the present century; and the work is done all the more effectively, from the author's kindness of manner, and his entire avoidance of the popular clap-trap of unguarded denunciation. Take, for example, Dr. Pusey's test and definition of the Rule of Faith, as held by the English Church on the one hand, and by Rome on the other. Nothing can be clearer or better. Take his showing of the Romish doctrine of Infallibility; and of the cultus of the Blessed Virgin. Take his exhibition and proof of the influence of the Forged Decretals on Romish Discipline. If Rome has had heavier blows aimed at her in late years, we do not know by whom. If Dr. Manning is a man of

sense, he will rue the day when he provoked such a disclosure of the weakness of the Romish argument.

In some of the strictures called forth by this volume, it has been maintained that Dr. Pusey is untrue, even to the extent of disloyalty to the English Church; and that his apostacy to Rome may most certainly be anticipated. We confess that we believe he is in much less danger of going to Rome than many of those who use such language. Here, for example, and it is only one instance, is what he says of the Church of England. "It is very observable how the presence of the English Church keeps this belief [of the Blessed Virgin] from taking the forms which it does where it is unchecked. This may be one of her offices, in God's hands. She preserves the entire Faith, such as our Lord left it with the Apostles, to evangelize the world. She believes all which the undivided Church believed, as of Faith," &c. p. 259.

In saying all this, however, we add, that we greatly doubt the wisdom and propriety of several of the positions which Dr. Pusey has taken, both defensive and offensive. With our appreciation of the Church of England on the one hand, and the Church of Rome on the other, as brought to the test of a true, genuine Catholicity, we say distinctly, that he has not, on certain points, met his shrewd, wily, casuistical opponent, with the most effective weapons. For example, in one of his defensive and explanatory Letters in the public prints, published since the volume was issued, he avows a readiness, in the event of a restored Unity, to "recognize the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome." Yet, Dr. Pusey must know, that on Catholic principles, there are several other Bishops, whose claims to such Primacy are higher than that of the Bishop of Rome; and not a few, whose claims are at least equal to his; and that of these, the Archbishop of Canterbury is one.

Again, he says, "I have long been convinced that there is nothing in the Council of Trent which could not be explained satisfactorily to us, if it were explained authoritatively, i. e., by the Roman Church itself, not by individual theologians only. This involves the conviction on my side, that there is nothing in our Articles which cannot be explained rightly, as not contradicting any things held to be de fide in the Roman Church. The great body of the faith is held alike by both."

This paragraph surprises us. Dr. Pusey knows, that the errors of the Council of Trent, in its Creeds, its Canons and Decrees, are regarded by the Church of Rome herself, as being de fide. Besides, there is another point of vital importance. Previous to that Council, Romish Corruptions, gross as they were, were held in a state of solution. At and by that Council, they were crystallized into form, embodied into dogmatic statement, and received the imprimatur, formal and authoritative, of that Church. Thenceforth, the hindrance to Union with Rome became normal, constitutional,-one entering into the very foundation of her System; and so, admitting no possibility of explanation. Had Dr. Pusey chosen to say, that that Council was, in no sense, an Ecumenical one, and so, in no way, entitled to the regard

of an English Churchman, he would have intimated a way in which a Union of the Western Churches is among the possibilities of the future; or, had he, like Archbishop Wake, discussed the question of Union with that class of Roman Catholics represented by the moderate Gallicans, and they were once numerous and powerful, he would have appealed to the sympathies of all true Catholic Churchmen. But, in respect to Rome as she now is, there are some things of more pressing importance even than Union; for they are conditions on which, and on which alone, Union is either possible or desirable.

Neither does the attitude which Dr. Pusey assumes toward Rome seem to us a particularly commanding one,-explaining away, or showing how may be explained away, certain Modern Romish Novelties and corruptions, as no insuperable barrier to Union and Unity. And all this, too, is at a time when Rome is growing every year more insolent, more intolerant, more infatuated; and, in all that gives character to the System, more offensive to all true Catholic feeling. Such apparent uneasiness at separation from Rome, surely, is not the best way, on the part of an integral branch of the Catholic Church, to command respect, to challenge attention to its own claims, or to lead the Church of Rome to cast aside her uncatholic abuses and errors.

Very different from this is the tone of this same Dr. Manning, on the occasion of his late enthroning at Moorsfields. After such an exhibition of the spirit and designs of that Schismatical Sect, in the very heart of England, we can hardly be surprised at the almost impatience which some of the noblest men in England are manifesting at the appearance of the Eirenicon. Dr. Manning says:

England is not further from the faith and unity of the Church now, than when St. Gregory sent the pallium to St. Augustine. And St. Augustine could little foresee the glories of the Saxon Church, or the perilous and majestic greatness of the Norman. What may be our future, God only knows, but we are bound in faith to hope great things, and in fidelity to endeavor them. We should fail in our duty to our Divine Master, if we were to aim at anything less than the conversion of England, the redemption of all our brethren from heresy and from Schisms, the reconciliation of our country, dear to me next after the Church of God, to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. It is a paltry service and an earthly prudence which aims at anything less than the whole breadth of our divine commission. Two things are certain, the one, that Protestantism, after running, like other heresies, its course of 300 years, is dissolving and vanishing away; the other, that the Catholic faith is irresistibly expanding on every side. These two operations never rest. Everything that wears the semblance of a theology or of a Church out of the unity of the only true fold, is visibly changing and passing out of sight. In a generation or two, the Anglican religion will be like Donatism or Arianism, a page in history. The immutable and imperishable Church, in the midst of a world-wide conflict, which is rising higher and higher every day, will be all the more visible to the nations of the sole ark of salvation, moving upon the face of the waters. For this we will labor on, in

perfect confidence that God will accomplish His own work when and as He wills."

Far more worthy of a defender of an integral branch of the Catholic Church as it seems to us, and better suited to the occasion, are the words of Canon Wordsworth :-" If we of the Church and Clergy of England, seek to make compromises and accommodations with the Papacy, we shall alienate and repel from us those holy, pious, and learned men in Italy and France who best know its corruptions, errors, and usurpations, and its infatuated adhesion to them, and who are weary of them, and groan under them, and who now eagerly yearn for union with us on the solid basis of Holy Scripture, interpreted by the voice and practice of the Catholic Church in primitive times."

The Divine Life and the NeW BIRTH. By the Rev. JAMES Craik, D.D., Rector of Christ Church, Louisville, Ky. Author of "Search of Truth," &c. Boston: E. P. Dutton & Co. 1866. 12mo., pp. 359.

--

The key note to this book, the distinct idea which Dr. Craik has here so elaborately wrought out, was brought before the Church by him in a former volume, "The Search of Truth." Further reading and reflection, the general discussion of the subject, and the constant developments of various forms of Error in our country, we suppose these were the influences,-have led the author to recast the volume, and to produce what is almost an entirely new work. In our comments upon Dr. Craik's previous volume, we dissented from some of his phraseology. It is merely a matter of definition of terms. In his present treatise, he recognizes the existence of some of these technical difficulties, and we assure him that he has not over-estimated them. The whole question turns upon the use of the term Life, and its employment in a System of positive Church teaching. Given Dr. Craik's definition, we have not one word of dissent.

The great principle, however, which he announces and illustrates with so much ability and clearness, is not only undeniably true, but it is of the greatest possible importance. That principle is, the Universality of Redemption, and its benefits, in a certain sense, coëval with, and co-equal to, the necessities of Man. The popular theology teaches, or implies, that up to the Advent of Christ, Man was under a mere System of Law; and that the Gospel was only designed for a certain elect few. Dr. Craik, in the great truth which he enunciates, gives the death-blow, not only to Pelagianism, but to that narrow System of John Calvin, and to the Rationalism, and Infidelity, which, with the fidelity of a shadow, have followed in its train, on the Continent, and in Great Britain, and in our own country. Reason, instinct, consciousness, and observation are all in revolt against its dogmas. In relieving the Plan of Salvation by Christ of the difficulties which thoughtful and honest-minded, but badly educated men have always felt upon the subject, Dr. Craik has achieved a work of great value. His arguments are always from God's Word and from the very nature of the Atonement, as therein revealed. One of the most

valuable of the Chapters now added, (Chap. VIII.,) gives the testimony of the Primitive Church to this view of the Gospel, and some of the most distinguished of modern divines. In developing his main truth, he also traces it clearly in its relations to the Doctrines and Institutions of the Church; and shows its bearings upon some of the mischievous errors of our times. Four new Chapters, on the Creed; on Divine Revelation-an Appeal to Human Reason; on Church and State; and on Christian Unity, conclude this timely volume.

The Clergy will find the work an excellent one for their Parish and Sunday-School Libraries, and the very thing that they need to place in the hands of a certain class of their parishioners. In this way it should be extensively used.

ESSAYS ON THE Supernatural Origin of CHRISTIANITY, with special reference to the Theories of Renan, Strauss, and the Tübingen School. By the Rev. GEORGE P. FISHER, M. A., Professor of Church History in Yale College. New York: Charles Scribner & Company, 124 Grand street. 1866. 8vo., pp. 586.

In our last No. of the Review, in our notice of Dr. Bushnell's work on Sacrifice, we gave an illustration of the extent to which a bald, brazen-faced Infidelity is taught in New England, in the name and under the cover of Orthodoxy. It was with some interest, therefore, that we opened the volume before us, on such a subject, from the Professor of Church History in Yale College. It gives us sincere pleasure to find, that Prof. Fisher has not only no sympathy with the irreverent spirit, the brain-spun speculations of such men as Dr. Bushnell; but, that he has set himself to work, to expose the inconsistences, the contradictions, the absurdities, of the leaders of what is called the School of Modern Criticism. Prof. Fisher is evidently well read in modern German Theological Literature; and, as with the late Dr. Murdock, he has lost all respect, certainly all reverence, for it. He does not hesitate to say, that "Positivism is Atheism ;" and that Theodore Parker, "in his practical use of the documents, is not less arbitrary than his Tübingen compeers. He believes, where it suits him to believe; and elsewhere, the authority of the Evangelist goes for nothing." In that single sentence, Prof. Fisher has described the whole System of modern German Infidelity.

The author does not take up at all the subject of Inspiration, which is of course the great question, nor the alleged discrepancies in the Gospel Narratives. His object is to prove the genuineness and credibility of the Books of the New Testament. Perhaps the ablest of these Essays, certainly the most thoroughly considered, are those on "The Genuineness of the Fourth Gospel," and on "Recent discussions upon the origin of the first three Gospels." St. John's Gospel, especially, so full of the God-man, has always been the object of the intense spite of these petty quibblers. In these two Essays of Prof. Fisher, the silly sophistries and the groundless assumptions of Strauss and Baur are thoroughly exposed, and are treated with quite as much serious attention as they deserve. It is not argument, which can ever