Part 1

Transcribed from the 1843 Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans [first edition] by David Price.

SUBSCRIPTION THE DISGRACE OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH.

* * * * *

———

BY THE REV. C. N. WODEHOUSE, CANON OF NORWICH.

———

* * * * *

London: LONGMAN, BROWN, GREEN, AND LONGMANS. NORWICH: CHARLES MUSKETT.

MDCCCXLIII.

SUBSCRIPTION THE DISGRACE OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH.

IN human affairs, when attention is powerfully attracted to some question of absorbing interest, the effect frequently is as though one half only of the subject were visible to the eyes of the understanding. The mind fixes on some peculiar point. On that a partial light is exclusively cast; till in time it is discovered that others, consigned for a while to an unnatural obscurity, are in reality of greater moment. They have quietly grown in importance—like hardy trees unnoticed by the planter, as not requiring his care—till they are suddenly developed in their true character and vigour, to the astonishment of those who had overlooked them; and demand, if it be not too late, the deepest attention and the most active intelligence to control or direct them.

While Charles I. and Archbishop Laud were absorbed in maturing their favoured plans for Church and State, opposite and deeply-rooted opinions, whose force they never paused to appreciate till it was useless, were ripening all around them; and their lives became a sacrifice to their blindness. While James II. was only intent upon enforcing the dictates of his own one-eyed bigotry, the Revolution was already accomplished in the hearts of his people; and William III., the instrument to realize their wish, was almost at the gates of London. While Mr. Canning was delighting the electors of Liverpool with his eloquent, and to them convincing, denunciations against the minutest change in the parliamentary representation of this nation; while he was admonishing them, with a wisdom then esteemed oracular, “_Spartam nactus es_, _hanc adorna_,” a few brief years were to give us almost a new Sparta; new electoral departments; new laws and forms of election; new qualifications, and thus new constituents; and, more than all, new influences upon electors and the representatives elected.

And thus, as it appears to the writer, will it come to pass with respect to the subject now to be briefly considered. While the minds of the most able divines in our nation are bent to one point; are engrossed in discussing the meaning of our Confession of Faith, the interpretation of our Articles of Religion; they are imperceptibly nourishing the growth of a conclusion more irresistible and more unmanageable than even all the complicated questions now so eagerly debated: for they are, by their differences and divisions, demolishing the whole force of the solemn assent required to that confession. Amidst the present confusion of tongues, the language of our Articles has still less than it ever had a definite meaning. Subscription, instead of being the tie which is to bind people to certain opinions or truths, is become a rope of sand. So uncertain is the trumpet’s sound, that it no longer, as of old, proclaims the spirit of an united host, but turns every man’s sword against his fellow: and Englishmen must soon awake to the conviction that Subscription, according to the plain meaning of words, is blown to the winds, and become the disgrace and not the safeguard of the English Church.

2. When the Saviour of mankind was about to leave this earth, He consoled his dejected followers with the promise of a gift which should even compensate for His loss, and exercise a special influence upon Christians in all future ages of this world’s existence. “If I go not away the Comforter will not come.” And He then announced one of the purposes for which He should come. “He shall guide you into all truth.” Of all the qualities which can elevate the character and enlarge the usefulness of man, truth is the most lovely and powerful. If it be asked, what is, in briefest terms, the occupation of the ministers of Christ, it is, to exhibit truth to their people: and, in all their teaching, this it is which will establish their influence over the human heart, or at least that without which no wholesome influence can be exerted, namely, that each is a lover of truth.

But how is truth to be conveyed from man to man? Only through the medium of language. And what is language? A set of signs, or sounds, or words, which by general use and agreement mean certain things. But all human provisions are imperfect, and language is imperfect: and words may be artfully put together so as to have one meaning with the speaker, and another to the hearer; or written language may be twisted from its primary sense, and forced to a use contrary to the intention of the writer. Yet truth is a real thing, and every honest man knows that it is so; for whoever speaks that to another which he knows is not understood in his own sense by the hearer; whoever twists written language from the plain purpose of the writer; whoever, by a studied obscurity, veils his real opinions in order to mislead others, is a liar. Let no one be offended by a plain term which Scripture sanctions.

He who is justly branded with the imputation of such a vice as falsehood, is, in the common estimation of the best part of society, contemptible. But if a minister of the Gospel, a divinely commissioned teacher of truth, shall expose himself to such an imputation; if, in so solemn an act as Subscription to Articles of Faith, or in the interpretation of them, the plain meaning of words is evaded, or a sense put upon them which in common discourse between man and man would be deemed dishonourable and wicked, the character of that person as a teacher of truth must be damaged, and his influence impaired. He may indeed be surrounded by a set of admirers captivated by his talents, and their applauses may preserve his self-complacency, but the final verdict will yet be against him. It is possible that this error of the mind may arise from self-delusion, and then the guilt is diminished, but an evil result must still ensue; for as the root is so will be the plant, and good fruit cannot grow out of falsehood or dissimulation. If we remove the case from one individual to numbers, the general effect will of course be proportionably worse, and the conclusion will be drawn that _many_ of the appointed teachers of truth are not lovers of truth.

We may take, however, a less extreme case, and suppose only, that amongst the teachers of truth a great difference of opinion has arisen as to some of the doctrines of which they are called upon to treat, as to the Confession of Faith which they have to maintain, and as to the terms of the Subscription by which they declare their assent to it. Then the conclusion will be—_when this difference is brought in glaring colours before the public eye_—either, that the Confession itself, or the form of assent, is so obscurely worded that it cannot be understood; or that they are intolerable to the conscience of many subscribers, and so must be somehow evaded; or lastly, that words, to which a definite meaning has been assigned in past ages, have now lost that meaning; and that the learned, the pious, the teachers of the nation, are incapable of discovering and fixing the sense which they are now to bear.

Let it be fairly considered how far the present state of things in this nation agrees with any of the cases above supposed: and if it does so agree, then it is maintained that, on the principle of a sacred love for truth, Subscription is become the disgrace of the English Church.

3. It cannot be argued, in mitigation of the supposed evil results, that the present controversy on this subject is confined to certain classes of society, the studious, the well-educated, the members of our Church. Half our newspapers are teeming with it; some of our periodicals are almost confined to it; all, it is believed, are occasionally employed in its discussion. It is finding its way into almost every class of society. The commercial travellers’ room, we are told, has engaged in it, and much might many a sophistical controversialist learn from that numerous, acute, and ubiquitous body of men, who know more of the real opinions of the great mass of the people than any other class that can be named.

When our Lord remarked, “The harvest is plenteous,” He pointed to the multitude of unconverted souls; and surely England is not without its full proportion of such, towards whom the most anxious thoughts and zealous exertions of the Christian minister are naturally to be directed. The intelligent Christian, the well-affected churchman, may be ready to make every charitable allowance for the imperfections of our Church—though charity is not the virtue of these days—but the criminal, the profligate, the sceptic, over whom it is most desirable, yet most difficult, to obtain an influence for their good, are proverbially the most acute in discerning the defects of their appointed teachers, in noting any inconsistency between the lesson and the instructor. Suspicion is the very atmosphere they breathe; and to rejoice in iniquity, especially where there is a profession of religion, is, alas! too natural and agreeable to them. In whatever degree then the teacher of truth shall expose himself to the imputation of a want of veracity amongst the irreligious, deplorable is it to contemplate the decline of a wholesome influence which must ensue. The writer has himself witnessed a lamentable instance of this result in one of the most accomplished men of late times, now no more, whom he wishes it were allowable to name. Could some of our controversialists look into a conclave of youthful profligates, led on, it may be, by some ingenious sceptic, they would blush to hear the comments on their own writings; the bitter and triumphant questions—What is it which these our discordant and subtle instructors really believe? Do they believe anything? They subscribe, and reap the profit. Let them tell us what this Subscription and these Articles of Faith really mean, and then it will be time enough for us to consider about attending to their instruction.

Add to this the obvious reasoning of the dissenting part of our population. The best amongst them cannot but see some justification of their own separation from a Church whose teachers are proclaiming throughout the land, from an hundred pens, the discordance of their sentiments as to their own Confession of Faith: not mere shades of difference reconcileable with a general agreement in its object, but a division for instance on, to them certainly, a leading question. Was the Reformation a good or an evil? The more worldly amongst them of course hail with delight what they will designate as the quibbles and evasions of men apparently eager to escape the trammels of a subscription solemnly made, which during three centuries has occasioned troubles, and persecution, and separation, and exclusion in the Christian fold, and is yet further than ever from establishing its professed purpose—“Consent touching true religion.”

A still larger class, amidst the din of controversy, pick up a few popular reports which help to confirm their indifference to religion itself, and their preconceived notions as to Subscription. These people, they carelessly conclude, live by it: they wish to receive the tithes, and they must sign the Articles: now at least we know from some of themselves how much they believe them.

If these views are correct, and these apprehensions well founded, may the earnest request of one who has long pondered over these things in sadness arrest the attention of those who are capable of providing a remedy! Let not his appeal, in behalf of a Church in which he sees the elements of usefulness unparalleled, to the great body of its ministers and members whom he deeply respects, and in the cause of eternal truth, be deemed an unfriendly voice. Let him not be considered an enemy because with faithfulness, yet with humility, he entreats his countrymen to consider how far Subscription is become the disgrace of the English Church.

4. Although the present state of things as to Subscription is so notorious that it cannot be denied, yet it may be well to confirm what has been advanced by a few particulars. The Thirty-nine Articles are our Confession of Faith, though they are hardly entitled to that appellation, being drawn up rather to meet a special emergency in the history of Christianity than to present a _complete_ compendium of catholic truths. Several points left untouched by them, or very briefly noticed, require at this time to be strongly inculcated. They are, however, our only Confession of Faith, ever to be valued and revered; and it is required that every clergyman should declare, and subscribe, ex animo, that he believes them to be agreeable to Scripture. A similar declaration is required with respect to the Book of Common Prayer.

It is not the writer’s object to point public scorn against individuals, neither is it any satisfaction to him to notice at all the supposed defects of other men: rather is it a source of real sorrow to him to observe how censure has been cast to and fro, with an unsparing hand, by Christian writers and ministers of his own day and church. He speaks simply for the sake of truth, and in that attempt unwillingly adduces only what is necessary to his purpose. He speaks also in very general terms, considering it sufficient only to allude to opinions which unnumbered publications have rendered familiar. While the terms of our Subscription are strong and decided, several sections of the English clergy embrace a different view with respect to it.

If there be any conclusion which the history of England irresistibly conveys to readers of honest minds, it is this, that our Reformers in forty-two Articles, and afterwards in thirty-nine, intended to put forth a strong and unequivocal protest against the errors and corruptions of Romanism. Much would it have startled them to be told that the time would arrive when English clergymen would subscribe to these Articles, and then proceed to contend that they are not to be estimated as a protest against the anti-Protestant proceedings of the Council of Trent. They were accustomed, no doubt, to insincere subscription from men still Romanists at heart; but the deed was secret, it shunned the light: it was, with a very few exceptions, practised without open defence.

It is not intended to affirm that an interminable war is to be carried on by us against the Romish church: rather it is our duty to desire, without compromise, union with all Christendom. Subscription alone is now in view; and while that remains as it is, and English words retain their meaning, and an English history of facts can be found, and any clear apprehension of the meaning of truth remains with us, the perversion of our Form of Subscription, and the misrepresentation of our Articles, attempted by any who argue that they were not intended to condemn Romanism, whether as held before or after the Council of Trent, ought to excite, in every honest mind, an indignation which it is a virtue to feel, and a duty to express. If it be questioned where such views have been advanced, it is sufficient to refer to Tract No. 90, now before the writer of these pages, though other instances might be cited from authors who have subscribed the Articles.

If we turn to another section of the English clergy, that most opposed to the views of the tractarians, however they command our respect from their piety, and zeal, and hearty attachment to Scriptural truth and sound doctrine; yet some of them cannot be esteemed clear of all blame on the question now considered. The writer can here speak from personal knowledge. In their views as to baptismal regeneration, certainly opposed to the strict language of our formularies; in their dislike of other parts of our services, and sometimes in the disuse or change of certain terms, is to be found a proof that to them Subscription is not altogether satisfactory; and the often-avowed concession, that the excellence of our system of doctrine and worship, _as a whole_, reconciles their minds to some imperfections, is enough to show that, in subscribing, some violence is done to simple truth. They argue, and justly, that no human work can literally demand an unqualified approbation, but our Subscription does require it. Such arguments, then, cannot be altogether satisfactory to him who uses them, or to many to whom they may be offered; and truth, it cannot be denied, is to some extent dishonoured and damaged in their use.

In that section again of subscribers who embrace Calvinistic doctrines, though the writer considers that some of the Articles are more unequivocally favourable to them than their opponents, yet it cannot be forgotten how frequently and decidedly it has been declared, ex cathedrâ, that theirs are not the doctrines of the Church of England.

Another large section of the English clergy may be now comprised under the name of old-fashioned high-churchmen; and of that title, it is believed, they will not themselves complain. Many of them would gladly extract the honey from the tractarian school, without sufficiently considering how poisonous the plant whose growth they are to some extent fostering. They insist often on an exact compliance with Rubrics, and must forgive me for saying that few amongst them have fulfilled these in their own practice. Till very lately, it would indeed be difficult to find many clergymen, or one bishop, within the last fifty years, who have strictly observed the Rubrics—still less the Canons. Some of them speak also of a literal subscription; but here again the writer can of his own knowledge state, that numbers claim and use a considerable latitude in subscribing, and are satisfied with asserting their _general_ attachment to the Formularies of the Church. Of their Arminian views as to doctrine, it is hardly necessary to call to mind how much they are opposed to others amongst their brethren, and, in the writer’s judgment, to the Articles themselves.

In another section may be comprised those who desire improvement in many things relating to the spiritual affairs of our Church. Some have openly expressed this desire; a far larger number cherish it in silence. They who have spoken out have strongly stated their conviction, that a Church, without the means of even entering upon deliberation as to our general improvement in its spiritual concerns, is in a false and unscriptural position. With respect to the Forms of Subscription and the interpretation of the Articles, some have formally requested a change, or rather an authoritative solution of the many doubts and uncertainties which now embarrass the question.

Thus while we perceive the variety of opinion prevailing amongst these several sections—a variety which, were it not impeded by subscription, would find a harmless or beneficial vent in a free inquiry after Scriptural truth—we see also that from all of them, more or less, Subscription is requiring that which, in the ordinary affairs of life, high-minded men would abstain from; namely, the necessity for qualifying the plain and straight-forward use of language. Is this a condition favourable to the reputation of teachers of truth; and is it too strong a conclusion, at least from some parts of the above account, to affirm, that Subscription is the disgrace of the English Church?

5. It may be well to look at the result of such a state of things under another view. The differences above mentioned are now rendered notorious by innumerable publications. The laxity as to truth, that is with respect to the Articles, which they display, will be learnt and adopted. It will be justified by the example of clergymen who are indeed at one time censured by persons high in ecclesiastical station, yet by others in the same station applauded or defended, and never authoritatively censured or restrained. In another age a new set of opinions may arise equally differing from the literal sense of our Articles and Formularies. And who, with the precedent of these days before him, could proceed with confidence against the authors and abettors? The errors of a Socinian or an Arian may be of a more deadly character; but neither the one nor the other, in affixing his own interpretation to the Articles, or in subscribing with such doctrinal views, would depart a jot further from the true meaning of words than the author and the defenders of Tract No. 90. If that tract has driven one reader to such a conclusion, a conclusion which he states with pain and sorrow, it may encourage hundreds to the same; and, ere long, an Arian or Socinian subscription may be as common as in times past perhaps they were, with this lamentable aggravation, that in an age of better religious feeling, “men of piety and talent,” so publicly designated by Bishops of the Church, have taught the way to justify the deed.

6. The manner in which the present controversy is conducted greatly aggravates its evils. It is not only that differences exist and are eagerly discussed before the public as the judge of clerical orthodoxy, but that, owing to its character, the discussion assumes a peculiarly offensive form. It is not merely an inquiry after truth in which some warmth and zeal might be excused, but clergymen are imputing to clergymen dishonourable conduct: dishonourable on this ground, that a person holding the opinions impugned cannot be an honest subscriber, ought not to remain a minister of our Church. On all sides this discreditable course has been pursued, and it would be easy to furnish the proofs. The writer is bound frankly to own that what he condemns in others may be now charged upon himself; but never would he have entered upon these remarks except in the humble yet anxious hope that he may induce others to attempt a remedy for the evil.

Imagine such a state of things in any other profession. Imagine the Officers of the Army and Navy for years together accusing one another of dishonourably retaining their commissions. It is no answer to say that the remedy with them would be bloodshed, and that this alone restrains their pens; for this is not the fact. The accused would demand inquiry and trial, and the scandal would cease. The clergy enjoy the unenviable singularity of continuing to accuse one another, of dishonourable conduct; of acting upon mercenary motives; of a desire to make their convictions somehow square with their Subscription, that thus they may retain their position or emoluments as ministers of the Church. The controversy is disgraced throughout by an irritating reproach against character, which is neither becoming to the station of clergymen, or the manners of gentlemen; and degrades a profession which ought to be the last to exhibit such an example. It seems to be perpetually saying, such is the sense of our Confession of Faith; I have proved it, but you are subscribing in a different, in a false sense. Thus it is that Subscription, in its present state, has rendered what ought to be an inquiry after Scriptural truth, a perpetual and disgraceful taunt upon the honesty of the parties engaged. Character is damaged, or at least assailed, and no satisfactory result, no remedy ensues.