mostly been wont to cherish. But, individually, it cannot change our duties. Our duties are positive and unconditional; they lie towards our mother, the English Church, because God has assigned us our lot in her, and are irrespective of anything without her."

All this is very fine and dutiful, and submissive as coming from the Regius Professor of Hebrew, and Canon of Christ Church, to his primate, but it amounts to nothing after all, for every Presbyterian could say as much with reference to his Kirk, while scouting the apostolical succession as a figment.

Dr. Pusey descants eloquently upon the duties which Anglicans owe to their Church and the benefits which her children derive through her ministrations.

"In her our Heavenly Father has given us what out of her we could not have had, I need but allude to one precious gift whose value none can estimate, bestowed on us alone in the whole Western Church, and which I cannot understand how any communicant who loves his Lord could of his own act forego. One would not speak of persons in those Churches which refuse the cup to their members; sure as the loss is, God can make up to his own any losses which they sustain where He has placed them; but for one who has had that privilege bestowed upon him, voluntarily to forsake the communion wherein God has given it to him, it does seem such a wilful rejection of the gift of his Saviour's blood, as in any who knew what the gift is, one should dread to think of."—p. 14.

So Dr. Pusey thinks that the cup as administered by Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists, Methodists, and other good Protestants, not in communion with the Anglican establishment, is not a partaking of the blood of Christ,-seeing that these bodies, though in the west, form no part of the Western Church. And so we think. But we also hold that the cup is precisely the same when received from the hands of an Anglican bishop or minister. And if so, there is no rejection whatever "of the gift of our Saviour's blood," by those who forsake the communion of the Established Church. We have no intention to discuss with Dr. Pusey the question of communion in one kind, farther than to observe that the practice is sanctioned by primitive antiquity, and appears to have existed in the times of the apostles.

Dr. Pusey, notwithstanding his thankfulness for his lot in a "goodly heritage," has his misgivings; for while there are "real attractions to the Roman Church," he admits that "there are also real difficulties in the position of our (his) Church, which must be felt more keenly, as people realize more the doctrines of the unity of the Church,-what

our Lord intended that it should be, what it for a long time was." These difficulties are thus stated:

"There was, in our younger days, no visible Church to which to attach ourselves, except our own. The Roman Communion had, in this country, but her few scattered sheep, who had adhered to her since the times of Queen Elizabeth; she was herself asleep and scarcely maintained herself, much less was such as to attract others. We were not tempted then to look for any thing but that invisible unity, which, we trust, all the now-severed communions have in their one Head, in whom they all live,-from whom, though torn among themselves, we trust they are not rent. We dwelt alone, our island-situation a type of our Church, and were content, because there seemed no opening for anything beyond. We were scarcely aware that we were rejected by the Western Church, not formally acknowledged by the Eastern, because we were locally separated from both. Girt round in our home and living among ourselves, we felt not that we were regarded as aliens by those we saw not..... But it is otherwise now; the Roman Communion is now every where among us, and we must feel that if they could they would cut us off; it is brought home to us, that from whatever causes partly the sin of that first great schism of East and West, over which we had no control, partly through acts (whether they could be avoided or no) of our own Church, we are, as to actual communton, separated from the rest of the Christian family; we feel ourselves in a maimed condition; our relation to other branches of the Church is different from any heretofore. . . . . It is a fact that entire visible unity is not vouchsafed to the Church of these last days, and so until God be pleased to amend it, we may rest contented in our lot. Yet the very fact that we have to be contented, shows that we have trials; our people go abroad and find no home there; they see Churches, some flourishing, though some decayed, which at best own us but doubtingly; there is Christian life from which we are excluded; the Church, the common home of all, is, out of the space occupied by our sister or daughter Churches, no home for us; they return to ns and feel that we are solitary. Then comes Rome among us, and,-rejecting the Greek Church, of whose extent, as not being brought into intercourse with it, people are not aware, and so acquiesce in the excision of nearly half the Christian name as a light thing,-declares herself the Church, and offers to relieve our difficulties, and give vent to our sympathies, by placing us in communion with herself, the largest portion of the Christian world. And since the desire of union is a right one, it is when thus presented a temptation real though to be resisted. We have, ever since we were thus severed, been feeling again after union; and this longing after it although we could not attain it, may be a proof the more that we are a living though torn member of the one body. What is cut off has no feeling. It is while the wounded limb still hangs on to the body from which it is disjointed that it has pain. Sects have none. They boast themselves in their separation. Montanists or Donatists

rejected the Church as carnal, and set themselves up as the one pure Church in its stead. We have ever missed more or less what we have lost, and have been yearning after the visible unity and intercommunion which we have not. Our very errors have been in part owing to it. We mixed ourselves up at the first with foreign reformations aud impaired our formularies with a view to it. Since then our negociations with the Gallican Church, with Prussia, formerly with the Eastern Church, bear witness to our longings; at the beginning of this century when wars kept us apart from other nations, and Church principles were less understood, this desire of union showed itself in the very rejection of all true principles of union. Having no visible unity, people substituted an invisible; and not only so, which might have been right, but they sought to make a visible unity for themselves by disparaging that of the Church, by sympathising and associating with those who had forsaken her, and becoming like them. The same longing which some years past brought very many to the verge of Dissent, aad often carried them into it, is now setting in towards Churches, and is a sore temptation to many to forsake their Church for Rome."-pp. 19-25.

This

sore temptation" does not, according to Dr. Pusey, arise from any "fault" in his Church, but there are other difficulties which are of it, or rather "one difficulty from which all others flow,”—a want of "that holiness which should mark us (the Established Church) out visibly as a true living branch of the Holy Church.'" Dr. Pusey observes that the apostle well might ask the Anglican Church, the ques tion put by him of old" Whence come wars and fightings among you ?"

"These manifold divisions (he continues,) among ourselves, contending upon points which they on one side at least state to be fundamental, though we hope they believe better than they often speak; this bandying about of the name of heresy, and that, applied to holy truth, even the gift of our Lord to us in baptism, this casting out the names' of brethren 'as evil;' this impossibility of understanding each other, or making ourselves understood; alas! it is more like the confusion of Babel, when God hindered them from building the city, than that 'city, which is at unity in itself,' in which it was promised that there should be " one speech and one language.' Our laity thus far have no living guide; the lips of the priest' do not thus far, teach knowledge' for them; for persons whom they alike respect teach them differently, and one of the two great classes of teachers tells them often that the other is in fatal error. . . . . Can one be surprised that our poor frail nature is fretted often, instead of being humbled, by what is so unseemly; that persons have difficulty in recognising a Church so disturbed as the representative of her who is the pillar and ground of the truth; that they should seek to escape this strife, by going over where they

will find one who undertakes to guide them, allows them to surrender a judgment which they know not how to exercise and to have peace?"

Poor Church, which after an existence of three centuries, "is more like the confusion of Babel than that' city which is at unity in itself!'" about the meaning of whose very articles of faith there is a wide and irrecon ileable difference among her teachers themselves! No wonder, indeed, that devoutly minded persons should abandon this "Babel," and seek for peace in the bosom of that Church which alone is infallible. Dr. Pusey thus continues the sad position of his Church :

"Then as to life. Our Church has indeed great difficulties, because it has an unruly, commercial, luxurious, unrefined people to deal with. Antioch was probably of old in the most unfavourable position of all Churches, and we in many points resemble her. We must not visit upon our Church our national faults; but self-love blinds us to our own, makes us acute in seeing those of others. And so our Church bears the blame, if during the week our churches stand empty, while foreign churches in the Roman Communion [i. e. Churches professing the faith of St. Gregory the Great, and St. Augustine the monk, and attended by Englishmen in their own country ]! are full; and we her ministers are in part guilty that fasts and festivals have been so entirely and still are neglected, that the daily service is but just struggling into use, that our communions are so rare, our communicants so few, almsgiving so cold, luxury so rife, the very standard of our lower population as to the one most debasing sin so miserably low, our sense of responsibility so little acute, the presence of God so little habitually realised. Alas! my Lord, we need not go on with the sad catalogue; while we thankfully acknowledge that our Church has been an inestimable blessing to ourselves and to our people [we should like to see Dr. Pusey make this statement good], and is capable of being far more so [a statement to which we demur], did we carry out her provisions, and that the fault lies with us, not with her, and that it will become otherwise when we in earnest wish it, we must confess that she does not in such degree possess the note of holiness, as at once and without all doubt to allay people's misgivings about her Apostolic character."-p. 27.

Dr. Pusey thinks that "it is easy and not unnatural to ascribe the tendency to Romanism, which has of late burst upon us to the influence of the Tracts" for the Times; but he considers this "would be a shallow and untrue account of the matter." The Tractarians, he says, would not shrink from any blame which any of them may deserve; "but when there is a general stirring, as there now is, through the whole of Christendom," he thinks that

"It would be a superficial view of it to trace the workings in any part of the Church to any particular set of men or writings; we did not set the tide in motion by which we have ourselves been carried onward; we have felt that

there is a higher Hand than ours, which has raised the waters aud ruleth them; we are but one slight item in the vast sum, one link in the chain of causes and effects whereby he is working for his Church what he willeth."p. 29.

The learned Doctor considers it important to appreciate this view, because if the "movement were the work of our (the Tractarians) hands, or the effect of any writings of any man, it might seem capable of being stayed by the same means which produced it. It might suffice to warn against the tendency of writings which had called it forth." In the following beautiful and eloquent extract, in which Dr. Pusey alludes to himself, the extraordinary "movement is thus accounted for, and its results more than indicated.

"But now since even he who has been God's chief instrument has always insisted how little is his share; since everything good or evil has contributed to it [the movement;] poetry, arts, architecture, morals, Christian or Heathen, novels, music, painting, have either prepared for it, or being subsequently absorbed into it, have swelled its progress; our renewed intercourse with foreign Churches, and still more the evils aimed at our own, the suppression of our bishoprics, the assaults of dissent, the coldness of adherents, the anger of enemies, the lukewarmness or hostility of the State, strength or weakness, loss or gain, the traditionary system existing in our Church, though too often a dead letter, or the religious earnestness and life though most opposed to that system, and, in its defects, to the truth itself-everything deep, everything real, everything holy, deeds of charity, kindliness, severity, every temperament and habit of mind even the most unlikely, the most remote, or the most adverse, liberalism or sceptical tendencies, have alike ministered to it,—it is plain that he alone can have set it in motion who alone has all things at his command, and maketh everything to work together to accomplish his will. The tendency to Romanism [Catholicism], itself but one phenomenon in the manifold workings of this eventful day, is, as a whole, but a fruit of the deep yearning of the stirred Church to be again what her Saviour left her, one. Our severed members are being drawn to ourselves as a Church, and knit into one in us; as a Church we are being drawn to other Churches, that, in God's good time, the whole body may be knit together under its one Head. Any deep view of the Church as one whole, must create a longing to realise what, as in vision, it beholds. Our severed state is a maimed and imperfect condition, checking, we must fear, the full flow of that Holy Spirit through our disjointed portions, which, when perfectly present, makes what he pervades wholly one, even as He is the unity of the Father and the Son. To feel what the Church should be is to long that it be so. And if we come not with subdued hearts settled to wait God's time for his gift, and anxious to take no step but just where He leads, there must be risk that persons will seek unity in unallowed ways of 16

VOL. VI.