their fury fell upon Alexandria, just as happens in the course f a disease. And this was craftily done of those warriors against Christ; for with a view of having the subscription of many bishops to shew, and that Athanasius, when his turn came, might not even have bishops to sympathize with him, therefore they spread this general terror, and kept it in reserve (pedpov) for their insidious purpose. Senseless men, they did not consider that all they had to shew was their own violence, not of the deliberate assent of the bishops; and that, though brethren fail, and friends and acquaintance fall away, and none be found to sympathize with us, or to exhort, yet that God is a refuge for us enough, and far more than enough. For Elias was alone, in persecution, yet God was all in all to his saint. And our Saviour, giving us a figure of this, was left alone, and plotted against by his enemies; lest we should faint when deserted in persecution, let go our hope in him, or betray the truth; which may at the outset, indeed, seem to be in straits, but will be confessed, even by the persecutors, in the end."—Ibid. 47.

I have in my last paper said something about what is meant by "the truth," which Athanasius speaks of, and by which he says the Arians were confuted in the controversy; but, at this day particularly, one never can repeat too often, or enforce too earnestly, how it is ascertained. Its sources, then, in the judgment of the English church, which we maintain to be plainly coincident with the ancient church catholic, are two-fold-Scripture and universal tradition; tradition first, then Scripture, in order of time. Scripture first, and then tradition, in point of authority. Scripture proving, tradition teaching. The earliest and most remarkable illustration of this Anglican rule, by which we are distinguished both from protestants and papists, is to be found in the history of St. Cyprian, which sets before us, in his doctrine, the supreme authority of the sacred volume; and, in his incidental error of conduct, the right province of tradition; but no slight evidence of it will be found in the following brief extracts, written just a century after St. Cyprian's letters, which serve to exemplify it. We will first take the province of tradition, then of Scripture.

Athanasius speaks of tradition in passages too many to quote; for instance, in his encyclical letter to his brother bishops, he speaks of the antiquity of the tradition :--

"Rouse yourselves, with us, my brethren, I beseech you, as if ye, as well as we, had received the injury; let each come up to the rescue, as if in his own quarrel, lest in no long time the ruler of the church-nay, the church's faith-be depraved. Both are in jeopardy, unless God shall soon, by your means, set right what has gone wrong, and avenge the church. For our rules and forms are not now given to the churches for the first time, but were handed over, well and surely, from our fathers; nor does the faith date its beginning from this day, but has passed from the Lord, through his disciples unto us. In order, then, that what has been preserved in the churches, from the ancient believers up to ourselves, may not be dropped in our days, nor demand be made on us hereafter for what has been committed to our trust, rouse ye, my brethren, as stewards of God's mysteries, and witnesses of the attempt to consign them to plunder. Ye shall hear the full account of what has happened, from the bearer of this; but I have been eager briefly to tell you somewhat myself, that ye may know, indeed, that never the like has yet been done against the church, since the day when our Saviour, ascending into heaven, gave this charge to his disciples, saying- Go, disciple all nations, baptizing them,'" &c.

In like manner, when speaking of the proceedings of the Nicene Council, he insists on the agreement of doctors in the tradition, as the great criterion of truth:

"This, as the fathers have taught us, is really doctrine, and truly the token of teachers, to speak, one and all, the same; to be at variance, neither with each other, nor with their predecessors. For such as are otherwise circumstanced, are but worthless teachers, not true ones. For instance, the Gentiles speak different things, and dispute with one another; their doctrine is not true. But the saints and the genuine heralds of the truth agree together, instead of differing. Even though they lived in different times, yet they tend towards the same point, being prophets of God, who is one, and concordant preachers of the same gospel."-De Lect. 4.

Again, he speaks of the catholicity of the tradition thus-his immediate subject being the doctrine of the Trinity:

"Let us see, in addition, what was the aboriginal tradition, teaching, and faith of the church catholic, which the Lord gave, the apostles preached, our fathers guarded. In this the church is founded; and from it he who departs, neither is, nor can be longer called, a Christian. There is a holy and a perfect Trinity, &c. . . . . . That this is the church's faith is to be learned from our Lord's words, when, on sending forth his apostles, he charged them to lay this foundation for his church- Go ye, disciple all nations, baptizing them,' &c. . . . . And they went forth accordingly, and so taught; and that preaching has extended to every part of the church under heaven."-Ep. 1 ad Ser. 28.

With this majestic constancy of the church catholic in preserving the apostolic teaching, which she had received, he contrasts the fickleness of the Arians:

"They disturb and unsettle everything, nor even thus are content with their doings; for not a year passes but, as if it were a matter of civil contract, they meet together, and profess to draw up some decision about the faith; which brings on them ridicule and disgrace, more than anything else, since they themselves, and not any other parties, abrogate their acts. For if they were satisfied with what they had already drawn up, they would not attempt it a second time, and then make a third attempt, and be prepared to supersede it for a fourth when a short time is past and an opening occurs for their usual practices upon individuals."—Ad. Episc. Eg. 6.

Such is Athanasius's plain witness to the existence of an apostolical tradition in his day, on the high doctrines of faith interpreting Scripture; he will be found, however, not less decided in verifying and testing it by Scripture, and allowing individual Christians to do so. If it be asked, why-if catholic tradition be a sufficient guarantee for the truth of a doctrine-we have recourse to Scripture, I reply that, if God has given us and enjoined upon us two guides when one would be sufficient, this calls for gratitude, not for complaint; and that in matter of fact he has even bound upon us both scripture and tradition -the one as the formal depositary, the other as the interpreter of the holy truth.

One of the extracts above-cited begins thus :-"Let us see, in addition, what was the aboriginal tradition." What had been just adduced were proofs from Scripture, which, in primitive times, ever accompanied the appeal to the teaching of the church catholic.

Again

"I have delivered to thee, according to the apostolical faith delivered by the Fathers to us, introducing no speculations of my own, but tracing the doctrine I have been taught, agreeably to the Holy Scriptures. For that doctrine is concordant with the proofs already adduced in confirmation from the Holy Scriptures."-Ep. ad Ser. fin.

In another place, he speaks more at length

"He who is faithful, and a disciple of the gospel, having grace to discern spiritual things, and having built his house of faith upon the rock, stands ever settled and secure from the craft of these men. But the simple, as I before said, and he who is but defectively catechised in doctrine, looking only to the words used by the adversary, and not entering into their meaning, is forthwith allured by their practices. Wherefore it is good and needful to pray for the gift of discerning of spirits, that each may know, according to St. John's injunction, which to reject, which to admit, as friends and adherents of the faith... But since holy Scripture is more powerful than anything else, therefore I advise such as wish to know fully about these things, to study the divine oracles."—Ep. ad Ep. Eg. 4.

for

Two remarks only are necessary to explain the doctrine of private judgment upon Scripture, with which I bring this number to an end. First, while it is abstractedly open to every one to verify tradition by Scripture for himself, yet it is not so in matter of fact. It is as wrong the generality of Christians to attempt it, as if there was no right at all. This is evident, even at first sight. Every one may be a lawyer, a soldier, or an orator-that is, there is no law of the land against it; yet most men would but bring upon themselves vexation and ridicule if they attempted to be either of the three. Now, it is as certain that the interpretation of Scripture requires qualifications for the due performance of it as pleading or fighting; knowledge of the languages does not come by nature. It may, indeed, be objected that a divine illumination is promised us to lead us into truth; but I deny the fact. Surely there is no promise of a guidance into truth made to each individual, educated or not, and that by means of the bare text of Scripture; and, as far as we may judge, Almighty God is not wont to effect supernaturally, what may be effected in the way of nature. Now, saving faith, considered as a temper of mind, cannot be obtained, except supernaturally, on account of Adam's fall; therefore, for the obtaining of it, each individual must ask, and may humbly expect, the aid of divine grace. But saving knowledge, though it might be, and has sometimes been, supernaturally vouchsafed, as by inspiration, may be gained by natural means, and of it I am now speaking. Now this is the subject of catholic tradition, which, in the case of the majority of men, stands instead of individual examination. The critical interpretation, then, of Scripture, for the purposes of saving knowledge, though possessed as a right by all, can be enjoyed as a privilege by few; and they will be as mistaken who attempt it without, or beyond their qualifications, as any one who goes out of his depth in any matter of this world.

In the next place, I would say that the juxta-position of Scripture with tradition is ordinarily but a negative comparison of the one with the other; though it may be, if it so happen, much more. I mean, it must be rather used to see that tradition is not amiss than to prove that it is right. This is the very meaning of the word "test" or "verification," which is satisfied if there is no actual disagreement, and does not ask for more. I must explain myself. Scripture has but one sense, surely; but what that one full sense is, it may be, we are not (ordinarily speaking) able to ascertain for ourselves. Therefore, Providence has mercifully given us catholic teaching, or traVOL. X.-August, 1836.

X

dition; but even then it may so happen that, owing to the infirmity of the human mind, ordinary individuals may not see, for certain, that this catholic doctrine, even when confronted with Scripture, is the one real sense of Scripture. You will say this is a paradox, but observe what I say. Though the text of Scripture has but one sense, it seems, in matter of fact, to various persons, to have various senses, though they have had the catholic doctrine set before them; therefore, though they all believed that catholic tradition to be genuine, nevertheless, numbers would still hold that it might have, as far as the letter of Scripture goes, those other various meanings, had they not been assured authoritatively that it has not. The text of Scripture seems to have many senses, though it has but one; it will seem to have them quite as much after the one real sense is given as before; but what all inquirers will certainly see, and what will be sufficient to see, is, that the catholic is one of those senses which it may have, not that which it must-that it is not excluded by the text of Scripture from being true. Few men, perhaps, if left to themselves, would see any one sense such, as to be sure that Scripture could have none other but it; yet I suppose few men, indeed, if they examined diligently, but would also confess that, whatever other sense it might admit, it would, at least, admit the catholic sense. This, then, is the true mode of verifying or proving the tradition of the church universal by Scripture, not to insist upon seeing only that one sense in Scripture which the tradition assigns, but to examine whether there is anything in Scripture inconsistent with it. With these two cautions, private judgment upon Scripture is most salutary and desirable; let no one attempt what he cannot do,either by fancying he has a supernatural guidance which is not promised, or that he can find a scientific definiteness in Scripture language which has not been intended. Let him thank God for the clue given him to the sense of Scripture in the catholic faith, and let him use it to investigate the glories of God's grace in Scripture, as he might investigate his attributes in the natural world,-admiringly, thankfully, awfully, lovingly; enjoying, not disquieting himself,-not setting out with a doubt whether Scripture and tradition agree, but with a generous presumption in favour of their agreement.

THE DAILY CHURCH SERVICE.

DEAR SIR,-In the 2d volume of the "Tracts for the Times," there are some remarks in answer to a correspondent of yours, in which a wish is expressed for the more frequent adoption of the daily service. May I venture to suggest some other reasons for the practice, which I think that writer would approve, which flow from the spirit of the church itself, and which, therefore, not being external, cannot eventually be frustrated of their object. Let me state the reasons in my own person.

In the first place, I consider it my duty, according to the direction of the rubric, "to say daily the morning and evening prayer, not being let by some urgent cause." This I may do, either alone or with my family. And such being the case, it is far more desirable

that I should say it in church than out of church, and if the distance will admit, the convenience is the same. In practising this, there can be no disappointment; for, at all events, such an act of obedience is its own reward.

Again, to take it in another point of view, if I had any parishioners who would wish that I should read with them, either the whole or part of the daily service, I should consider that, in all parochial avocations, I could scarce have any in which I could more profitably spend half an hour in the day. But, in all such domestic visitings, there is, in general, some uncertainty how far the persons really make such ministrations their own by partaking in them ex animo. Now, if any such person will come to church without any invitation, here there is the additional satisfaction of its being thus rendered their own act and deed, and therefore more beneficial to them. In adopting and maintaining the daily service for this reason, again, I consider that a person cannot be disappointed. There will always be found two or three who will be glad to join their minister, in the smallest parish.

The inducement of being able to draw a congregation by invitation appears to be liable to the following objections:-It is not, I conceive, in most instances, difficult to do so. External motives come secretly into operation; and persons who are thus induced to attend will either, in the course of time, fall gradually away, or be led to attach an undue weight to the external performance of a duty which will thus be rendered, like every other duty, a snare to the conscience, and become a painful, rather than a delightful service; and instead of being the very moving spring of all other more active duties, it will become a substitute for them.

May I venture to suggest also whether we are not apt to think too much how we may draw people to church, (though far from being the spirit of that excellent writer,) and too little of the occasions when, for their own benefit, and that of the church, they should be debarred, or, at all events, in some degree restrained, from such a privilege.

In the present day, it seems hardly sufficient for the revival of a forgotten duty to point to the rubric. To those who require arguments of utility, it may be stated, that the clergy would find, in the general adoption of it, more to the regulation of their own minds "in quietness and confidence," and consequently to the real benefit of others, than in more ostentatious and exciting services in the cause of religion.

Among those who have adopted this practice in their country parishes, many names may be remembered which are most sacred among us; such as Herbert, Hammond, Kettlewell; and for further arguments, one need but allude to Mr. Newman's sermon on the subject, in his 3rd vol. What has been here said is by no means speculative; but the reasons for which the practice is observed by some, and, it is hoped, will be by more. Surely, if evil is to be averted from the church in England, it must be by such means, in connexion with a more frequent administration of the Lord's Supper, for the weekly commemoration of which the daily service is greatly subsidiary. Yours, truly, A. B.