« ПретходнаНастави »
writings, was far lower than that of the greater Stuart theologians. The arguments of our unknown author are modelled on the lines of those of Bishop Forbes in his Considerationes Modesta, and of Herbert Thorndike, both of whom he often quotės; but his especial merit is that of relieving the statement of the case from the ponderous load of learning with which nearly all theological literature of that age was encumbered, and putting it in a form sufficiently simple and tell. ing to come home to the understandings of all fairly educated persons, however unversed in the technicalites of controversial divinity. .
Mr. Oxenham's introduction, which occupies nintey-five pages of the volume, is chiefly devoted to a review of the various efforts at Reunion which have been made before and after the original appearance of this work, with especial reference to such names as Gregory Panzani, Franciscus à Sanctâ Clarâ (Christopher Davenport), Bishop Montague, Archbishop Wake, Dupin, Leibnitz, Spinola, Molanus, Bishop Jebb, and Bishop Doyle; and to an able survey of the religious collapse of Protestantism throughout the world—though he omits to point out that several still nominally orthodox American sects are now honeycombed through and through with Spiritualism-closing with an appeal from the standpoint of a moderate Roman Catholic for mutual explanations and concessions between England and Rome, in order to unite against the common enemy of Pagan unbelief. · Of course there are several difficulties which we could not help raising, were negotiations of the sort begun, which naturally do not affect him equally, but on the whole he has put his case with much fairness. Hereupon follows the original treatise, occupying from page 37 to page 316, and itself divided into eighteen chapters, in which the chief questions treated are the Pope, Invocation of Saints, Images, the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, Purgatory, Penance and Indulgences, Confession, Tradition, Ceremonies, and Anglican Orders, and all with singular clearness, as well as with a charity of tone rarer then than it is even now in handling polemical matters. Its curious anticipation of Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon and Bishop A. P. Forbes's Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles for it is clear that neither of these writers used it-is rightly pointed out by Mr. Oxenham, and we note the fact as testifying to an historical tradition which has never died out in the Church of England, and is indeed authoritatively embodied in Canon xxx. of 1604, to the effect that we have never broken off communion with Latin Christendom, and decline to retort the anathemas cast at us for retrenching certain things of which no one can deny that they are not only liable to abuse, but have actually been abused. The English Reformation : how it came about, and why we should
uphold it. By CUNNINGHAM GEIKIE, D.D. 8vo. pp. xvi.-512.
(London: Strahan and Co., 1879.) No sharper contrast in tone to the anonymous Eirenicon, or indeed to Dr. Geikie's own meritorious Life of Christ, to which we had the pleasure of directing attention, could readily be found than this recent work of his, which is acridly partisan and indiscriminating throughout. Dr. Geikie is a very recent recruit to the Church from
some Presbyterian body, and while not as yet by any means at home in her annals, polity, and doctrine, has seemingly pushed his new admiration for Episcopacy so far as to assume the veracity, if not indeed the infallibility, of anything a bishop tells him, for we learn from his preface that some bishop wrote to inform him that the Reformation is menaced by a conspiracy, and that he at once accepted the inerrancy of this statement, setting to work upon the present book as the best means of counteracting the plot. The English Church Union, it would appear from Dr. Geikie, being a Ritualist league, and virtually Romish, is the head-quarters of this conspiracy (though, by the by, it has ten bishops on its roll, and its latest episcopal recruit, Bishop Medley of Fredericton, is senior by some years to any occupant of an English see, for he was consecrated in 1845, and Bishop Ollivant of Llandaff in 1849), and the
official organs' of the Ritualists 'frankly admit that their object is ultimate union with Rome;' while the only way to deal with the present distress is for “examining chaplains simply to give all candidates for ordination a paper of Protestant questions to answer,' so that 'those only who show themselves Protestants by their answers might be accepted.' Dr. Geikie is sure that, speaking the truth in love, as he does, his book will doubtless be assailed by the Romanists who have crept into English Holy Orders, but that the reader may feel confidence in its statements; and it may comfort Protestants to know that the doctrine of Apostolical Succession was not held by the Reformers who founded our Church under Elizabeth, for Presbyterian ordination was held valid till 1662. Having dealt with these questions elsewhere in this number of the Church Quarterly Review, we merely remind Dr. Geikie that, at any rate, his own previous ordination has certainly not been treated as valid, so that his personal experience must have made him aware that the Church of England under Victoria is agreed in this respect with the Church of England under Henry VII., and that there may therefore be other points of coincidence between them, as well as of common divergence from modern Protestantism, of which he, as a neophyte, is still unconscious. The history itself, commendable for the industry and the compression bestowed upon it, does not warrant that confidence of readers which its author demands, and does not even pretend to impartiality, but is utterly one-sided throughout, and it never seems to have occurred to Dr. Geikie that there must be something possible to be said for the side which Fisher and More espoused, and something against that which reckoned Crumwell and Poynet amongst its champions. With him, Queen Catharine of Aragon was an artful and crafty woman, the daughter of an infamous mother— Isabella the Catholic !-who entrapped the young and inexperienced Henry into a marriage unsuitable on the ground of disparity of years, as well as on that of her pre-contract with his brother. Here Dr. Geikie deliberately suppresses two weighty facts: first, that the second marriage to Prince Henry was almost exclusively the work of Henry VII., whose greed could not bear the notion of relinquishing the great dowry of the Infanta ; and next, that the assumption of the
title of Duke of Cornwall and heir-apparent by Henry VIII. immediately on his brother's decease (he is so entitled in a State paper at least as early as October 1502, six months after Prince Arthur's death on April 2, 1502), shows that both Henries were fully aware that Catharine had been Arthur's wife in name alone. Had so much as a faint possibility existed that the marriage had been consummated, it would have been necessary to have waited some time for possible issue of the earlier marriage, and indeed, Henry was not created Prince of Wales till February 18, 1503. But this is not so material a point as the earlier one, since several heirs-apparent were never created Princes of Wales, though always ranking as Dukes of Cornwall by right of birth, e.g., none of Henry VIII.'s three sons was ever created Prince of Wales, nor was Charles II. Contrariwise, no speck exists in his portrait of Anne Boleyn, and her purity' and 'chasteness' are dwelt on as if all authentic history did not brand her as the reverse. So, again, when speaking, naturally enough from his point of view, in strong condemnation of the prohibition and destruction of Tyndall's New Testament, Dr. Geikie studiously suppresses the notorious bibliographical fact that each part, as it was issued, appeared bound up with a virulent preface, which, to pious and honest churchmen of that day, read very much as one by Mr. Bradlaugh affixed to a new version, say, of the Old Testament, which he might think fit to circulate, would read to the eyes of Dr. Geikie and his friends. Once more, Thomas Crumwell, almost the worst character in all English history, is the object of strong panegyric, as 'faithful and true, unostentatious, charitable, merciful,' and only to be pitied for being the servant of so despotic a master. These few criticisms, not touching any doctrinal points whatever, will suffice to show that Dr. Geikie's work is historical in form only, but that its real character is that of a controversial lampoon, evidenced by its last words, where the wish is father to the thought : 'As for the conspirators, England loathes them, and will not rest till they be ejected from a Church whose wages they take while they betray her faith. But as England never cared a tithe so much for her Church since the Reformation as she has done since the 'conspirators' breathed fresh life into it, we take leave to doubt both the present loathing and the future ejection.
There is just as rabid writing, however, to be had on the other side of the question, and Dr. F. G. Lee's Historical Sketches of the Reformation (8vo. pp. xi.-427. London : Griffith and Farran) have as little claim to impartiality as Dr. Geikie's book. The volume is dedicated to some lurking sect of Reformed Episcopalians, whom Dr. Lee is pleased to describe as “the Prelates, Provosts, Priests, and Members of the Order of Corporate Reunion,' but who have not hitherto had sufficient confidence in their own titles and characters to give their names to the public, or indeed any tangible information as to their intentions and organisation.
Dr. Lee, albeit a man of ability, culture, and discursive, though inaccurate, reading, is deficient in the historical instinct. He lacks the capacity for comparing, weighing, and estimating evidence, so that he does not understand what any fact he adduces really proves. What he has done in the volume before us, broadly speaking, is to collect some of the most salient examples of violence and crime during Henry VIII.'s reign, adding to them a couple of the judicial murders of Roman Catholic priests under Elizabeth. But while his collection would be a sufficient reply to the statement, were any one now bold enough to make it, that the Reformation in England was carried on in a perfectly orderly, equitable, godly, and merciful fashion, it does not help the reader in the smallest degree to solve the questions as to whether the Reformation itself was necessary or inevitable, on which side the balance of wrong-doing and cruelty was heavier, and what were the real causes at work all round in Church and State. In Dr. Lee's eyes everything and everybody connected with the Reformation were bad ; everything belonging to the preReformation Church was admirable, and he appears to have just as much and just as little reason for his opinions as Dr. Geikie. But, at any rate, his estimate of Thomas Crumwell agrees with that of Dr. S. R. Maitland-a man who possessed the true instincts of the historian—and is far more trustworthy than Dr. Geikie's panegyric ; nor are there many people morally competent to express an opinion at all who will not agree with him as to the murders of Abbot Whiting and of the monks of the Charterhouse. But even for his own purpose, his work is of little practical value, for nearly every atrocity he chronicles was committed directly or indirectly by Henry VIII., and it is unnecessary to prove at length that he was never a Protestant at all. He did only the same kind of things, on a larger scale, which William II. and John had done before him, only that he had no Anselm or Langton to face him as they had. It is the story of what was done under Edward VI. and Elizabeth-though in many respects against the will of the latter sovereign—which would help to establish Dr. Lee's thesis, but he has not grasped the subject firmly enough in his own mind to realise that fact, nor that even so he would merely raise the question : What sort of training was that pre-Reformation system which produced such men as the Tudor Reformers ?'nor yet to understand how his almost exclusive reference to R.C. authorities, whenever he does give any references at all, is likely to discredit him with readers who would like to be sure that both sides of the question have been duly considered by one who undertakes to teach them. Happily, if Canon Dixon should complete the great work he has begun, we shall at last possess a full and trustworthy history of the English Reformation, and can dispense thenceforward with mere ex-parte manifestoes such as these two we have been noticing. History of the Reformation in Germany and Switzerland chiefly. By
Dr. K. R. HAGENBACH, late Professor in Ordinary of Theology at
Basel. Vol. I. (Edinburgh : T. and T. Clark.) THE history of the great religious revolution of the sixteenth century on the continent of Europe has been written so often and from so many standpoints that the present work night seem superfluous. But, not to mention such works as those of Döllinger, Fleury (which, however, even with the continuation, only comes down to the end of the sixteenth century), and of the Swiss D’Aubigné, which are all accessible in English translations, we do not know that we have in English any original work on the general subject of the European Reformation, though there are many dealing with that particular department of it which relates to these Islands." The work before us will, therefore, have a distinct sphere of usefulness open to it, and be welcome to English readers. Not that the author looks at the events of the Reformation from the peculiarly Anglican standpoint. He stands mid-way between all parties, and appears to lean somewhat more to the Swiss than to the purely Lutheran point of view. This is, perhaps, very natural, as Dr. Hagenbach is, we believe, himself a Swiss, and the substance of the work was originally delivered in the form of lectures before the University of Basel.':.
The present volume carries the narrative down to the period of the Peasant War, and to the height of the controversy concerning the Eucharist between Luther and Zwingle. Chapters I. and II. consist of an introductory sketch of the condition of the Church and of Europe generally at the time of the great religious upheaval, which is remarkably vivid and forceful, and appears to us more really admirable than the body of the history. So far as this is confined to the persons of the chief leaders-Luther, Melanchthon, Erasmus, Zwingle-we have a terse and animated narrative, with which little fault is to be found. Dr. Hagenbach has a good eye for character, and picks out the salient traits so as generally to present a striking portrait. But when he leaves the delineation of individual character, he becomes more verbose. His conception of narrative seems to be the successive presentation of a vast variety of details. Thus, in his description of the progress of the reforming movement in Switzerland, we are taken from one little town to another, with somewhat wearisome iteration ; and the same may be said as to the ' history of the movement in Germany. This may have been very natural in lecturing to a Swiss audience, but it is a mistake to retain the whole of the details in a work intended for the perusal of the general public of Europe. The analysis of the controversy on the nature of the Eucharist, as far as we have it in this volume, and without sympathising in the least with the line of opinion which the writer takes, seems to us acute and philosophical.
The Student's English Church History, from the Accession of
Henry VIII. to the Silencing of Convocation in the Eighteenth
of Waddington. (London : John Murray.). A FAIR, concise, and yet complete and very readable history, with, perhaps, the most trustworthy account we know of, of the Reformation movement. Every theological college student should read it as a matter of course. We only wish we could hope that every Churchman, whether lay or clerical, could be induced to do the same. ,