The Sun.
London, England, 1845-09-02 00:00:00

- ,A..„-- kw-) ,----------- ,-,(_--
. . ~
r ---,
it t!,--iengotch aeur eid7pon tosl:i Ge-----1--
• - - ,:. :, - ii-- - -I .. . , , .
• •., ...
.. ,
mould p- -
- - ~,,,,,,,„t"., . 4 . ..., ----...„. .: .
'.'----1----a--.. • - % Alb/ . ....
...
~ , ill ~,.8.,.,.,;:
~,,,,.\,,,,..6. axi:_. 21-,,,.,..v.:, -,.,:‘,..--..#,.;.,....., .4.:,y 7/, ,
tezehing error, 0-
i.
Vg sl'l.;. 43 , . --4...'--..,,- 1 ,4,,N
..,..
.. ...._, 4 e hare been *--
g:-.1-- ' ,<t
.ti:',.:4n., _ .
1//' • •-• \ ii i
1 Ctilati,.
. I :
' \ ...2'.,,•:•%.' • r%, -
-....• •--4 - '
, JA
1., : ../f, ( if—el,. --,--7,.. .. . ~,,... • ~. ~ 7.4' . . v 'DRoii.t. ' ' et" \ . /N. ' N,
''....,--0447445-e - LI ...-4.C. ) 4., t . • •. ~te ~.... 'OA , .
». _ -ounsimme,..orrati=2TaM.........r.-x-G-4111ft0.....1.151......, ...-.............1.6...,.............J.... 011.14

the other lan should !have been so absolutely puzzled at
being called upon to view the Roman Church as authoritatively
teaching error, that had 1 obliged Myself to do so, it would
have been necessary by main force to divert my mind from sp..
culating on theological subjects at all.
In such circumstances it was natural, or rather inevitable,
to fall back on the sort of theory contained in my work. I was
led, I say, naturally to such considerations as the following
" The progress from truth to error cannot be made in one leap;
persons cannot, on the mere word of an external authority,
embrace at once a whole class of new doctrines, foreign, and at
first even repugnant, to their moral nature. The doctrines,
again, to which I allude, are but accessories to the central
verities of the Gospel—not those verities themselves ; and sill
follow in due time, in proportion as those verities are rightly
believed, heartily embraced, and fed on by prayer and contem-
plation. The grglish Church, then, at present, witnessing as
it does those truths in its tormularies, but silent, to say the
least, on these accessories, does seem a providential ordinance
adapted to prepare minds by degrees for the doctrine and com-
munion of Rome " Almost every page of my work, I might
say, will show that this is the view I there advocated.
That such a course of conduct, if avowed, w 'a a course con.
sh.tent with perfect- honesty and integrity, cannot, I conceive,
be questioned. As to subscription to the Ankles, I have no
wish to enter again into a worn-out controversy ; but I believe
as firmly as ever that no consistent person, of whatever
opinions, can subscribe all our formularies without offering the
greatest violence to the natural meaning of language ; and,
considering that the existing church, in some shape or other,
is necessarily the ‘. iroponens," however grievous a burden
such formularies must be to any community, I do not think
any one need scruple in offering that violence, whether with
the view of reconciling the Articles to Roma,,, or the Prayer
Book to Lutheran opinions, so long as he says plainly, in the
face of day, what sense he does attach to the wor'ls, and rs•
mains without interference from constituted authorities. But
in my case my opinions were not only avowed, they were
mast conspicuously (many say with even an ostmtatioas pa-
rade) put forward. I called on " High Churchoien" of various
grades to combine in the objects of impressing more deeply on
the minds of our people the great truths to which I just al-
luded, and which they all protess, and willinglir staked the truth
of my own further opinions upon the resu' t. I was, and am,
most undoubtingly confident that nothing more is necessary to
dispose people fully for the reception of all Roman doctrine,
when brought before them, than a hearty, unsuspicious, and
laborious appropriation of that portion of truth plainly wit-
nensed by our Church. I might here, then, allude to the addi-
tional reason for giving up the hopes I entertained when I
wrote my work, which arises from the tinderiable fact, that
" anti-Roman High Churchmen" have shown no sort of wil-

PRI Cil sd,

lingness (quite the reverse) to unite with what are called " ex-
treme" persons on any such terms. But my pressnt purpose is
merely to point out how completely the decision of the Eccle-
siastical Courts has destroyed whatever there might otherwise
have been of plausibility in the theory I maintained as to the .
office of our Church.

I say, then, that however plausible such a theory might have
appeared so long as the holding of the Roman doctrine was
allowed to be an open question among our clergy, not a word
more need be said to prove how utterly extravagant it became
from the moment that all the instructors of our people were
bound to renounce some part of that doctrine. It rtgairee
certainly a very enthusiastic hoper to imagine that our Church
could really be made extensively available for the object sup-
posed, when every one who entet ed on her ministry, or received
a degree at either university, was called upon to renounce that
object as inconsistent with the claims of religious truth.
I have made it, I trust, sufficiently plain, that supposing me
still to agree in every sentiment I expressed in my work, nothing
which I have said constitutes my defence for remaining in my
present position. My defence was grounded on two maim sup-
ports ; both these supports have given way.
But I am bound to add, that in,,st firm, unmoved, and (as
I believe) immoveable as is my conviction of the main prin-
ciples advocated in the " Ideal," there was one incidental
opinion, of considerable importance to the present question, on
which my views have undergone a change. To show that this
change is rather in the application of principles than in prin-
ciples, allow me to quote a passage from the last chapter in
my work.
" He who is thus disciplined, who feels deeply his exceed-
ing blindness, helplessness, and ignorance, and the existence
without him of an, unknown and unspeakably precious reality,
will eagerly believe and appropriate whatever is placed before
him in the course of nature, professing to be a voice from,.
or an economical representation of that reality. Again
he will have fully learnt, &c.
will follow, as a primary axiom, that

his pa,en's have brou-ght him into connexion with a4,me
body professing to teach with authority, so long as be is able
to repose unchanged confidence in that body, it is that
very oracle for the conveyance to him of eternal truths before
which duty requires him to bow. Should ihe case be other—
wise, iu a heathen country, he will be able to discriminate
with precision between the right and the wrong in traditionary
st:oerstitions, and will thug elicit confirmation of his faith.' and

accessions to it' even out of corruptions of the truth.' But
rather' would he anticipate, that there is come home in which
this moral reality may have a secure rest and lodgment. that it
may be dispensed to men according to their needs ; or at least
he would be di awn with a most eager and spontaneous longing;
towards any body which would profe•s to be that home, And
those marks, in any society, would especially attract his view.
which appear to be most kindred in their natures and origin to
eternal truth itself; for instance; to use ecclesiastical language,
unity in doctrine throughout all ages—sanctity—Catholicity,
its proclaiming one and the same messages in all lands—Apos-
tolicity, its referring back to some signal ii.terfercnce with the
visible course of things from the world beyond the veil." (Pp.

510, 511.)
The principles here expressed, if suffleiently considered,,
would have prevented me, !think, from supporting myself in the
English Church on the theory which 1 have been drawing out :
and I should add that Mr. Newman took an early opportunity
of expressing to me his disapprobation of that theory. Ob-
serve distinctly, that I am not speaking cf those who (►ike my-
self indeed) are unable to recognise aey eefinite teas' ing what-
ever in the English Church, hut who (unlike myself) find ire
the Ilornate doctrines, as appreherided he them, thing, a hid' (I
do not say merely call for an enlarged memure of faith, but
which) offer actual and serious violence to their moral nature :
what is their duty is a matter altogether distinct. Much less
am I saying a word in disparagement of the principle I have so
earnestly advocated throughout my work, viz., that it is the
duty of all persons to accept heartily, conscientiously, and
practically, in the first instance, the religious system they are
taught. But I say, in my own case, that I think I was called
upon either to look on the Church of England as my teacher,
or to unite myself to the communion of the Church of Rome
and not to devise theories, under which I might look on one
Church as my teacher, while I remained in communion with
another.
Now it is some considerable time since Mr. Newman's
writings and teaching (however edifying I found it in all other
respects), altogether failed to commend itself to me as being
in the least exponential of any teaching of the F.nglisle
Church. lodeed, during that time, I might have seen that
1 oar deceiving myself in thinking that 1 did simply follow
his teaching ; for, whereas he strenuously disavowed any
authority except as interpretative of the one of the English
Church, when I was unable to accord to him that claim 1 was
unable to follow his teaching, in that very particular wkich be
himself represented as con:eiteting his only right to teach.
I should add, ton, that etideiveal thought and experience
has much increased my sense (eehich before indeed was very
great) of the extreme importance of a living and energising,:
dogmatic system. If the claims of such a system long re-
main unreergnised among us, I hardly knew how to express,
without appearing to agitate, how great are my fears as to the
miserable error into which even very well-intentioned and
right-minded persons may be led, in the course of inquiry and
speculation. Nor need I say how serious an addition this con-
stitutes to the many other grave phenomena which seem cla-
morously to enforce on us all the duty of reviewing very nre-
fully, and weighing very accurately, the reasons adducible ha
defence of our present position.
Nothing, indeed, can be more pregnant with mischief thatu
any step rashly and lightly undertaken, however good in itself..
Fur my own part, though my present convictions are not con-
sciously owing to any sudden extei nal impulse, but are the na-
tural result of my own thought and observation, it seems never-
theless a duty to make plain to ethers, as well as to myself, that
they are staple and genuine convictions, by refraining fom any
irrevocable step, until there may be time for my intentions to
become known wherever they would be really cared fur, and:
for any arguments or
.remonstrances to be duly weighed. At
the same time, I should he hypocritical if I affected to think it.
likely that my determination will be altered hy anything I &bail
hear said against it.
I remain, my dear
Most sincerely yours,
W. G. WARD.
•

In the present copy of this letter I have made one or two,
verbal alterations; and have, moreover, marked with an as-
terisk two passages which I find to have been misunderstood In
more than one quarter, and which w ere in fact inaccerstelys
expressed. In order to explain these passages, I will stated
brietly (for in a letter such as this there is no room for amplifi-
cation) what now appears to me the truth, on a subject which
I regard myse4 as having treated erroneously in my work.
In proportion as any one realises the extreme importance,
sacredness, and necessary mysteriousness of religious troth,
own exceeding blindness and helplessness, and the awfully se-
riots errors into which uncontrolled or misdirected specutatiom
may lead him, he will be unwilling, I conceive, to follow as ant
ultimate guide on matters of doctrine any authority which is
not directly entrusted by God with the office of dispensing re-
ligious truth. No teacher, then, who does not possess a direct.
Divine authority, much less one who distinctly disclaims it,
will ever exercise despotic influence over his belief ;
and if Providence has subjected him to some religious
body which does claim Divine authority to teach, front
the moment that he is deliberately unable to recognise
that authority, he will consider himself fully justified,
or rather beto,d, to look elsewhere, it tiaidy he may
meet with some other body, to whose communion he may
attach lime 11, and to whose teaching he may sebnatt himself.
What will be the ditty of such a one in case he should dis-
cern no authority which presents to !;is conscience tokens of s
Divine commission, I am not considering; but merely what
is his duty if he do discern such an one. In that case, I say
he is bound, when he is sufficiently sure of himself that it is a.
real matter of conviction, to submit himself to that authority
without reserve ; and I retract the contrary opinion, which is
contained in my work, as savouring of latitudinarianism, and
of indifference to religious truth. I think that one especial
dispensation by means of which God leads her re umble souls to his
true Church, is the circumstance, that othreligions bodie,
the more trustingly they are believed and obeyed, the more
cruelly pierce him who leans on them . but that his Church
convr ys to her children an ever-increasing sense of his Divine
authority, in propottion as they humbly trust her and lovingly
obey ter.
Those who care to know my reasons for thinking that the
English Church, whether her voice be listened for in her for-
mularies, or in her practical teaching, is no trustworthy guide
(and, I may add,
for thinking that neither the Bible nor an-
tiquity, interpreted by private judgment, ate any trustworthy
,tides either), I must refer to my large work, and to my
o Address to Members of Corrocation," where they will find
these questions treated of tit length.
An Ajection has been lately made to me in private, against
what has just been said, as follows has been objected
that the English Chu., ch does teach with Divine authority the
Creeds; because, so fir F. 5 they are concerned, she speaks,
" not as tine English Church, but as conve; ing to us the faith
of the Catholic Church, such as it was from the beginning."
But let me ask—how do we know that these Creeds contain
the faith of the Catholic Church such as it was from the
beginning? If by our own private researches into antiquity,
then our rule of faith is not the English Church,
but antiquity interpreted by private judgment; which is
altogether a different matter. The objector, indeed, to
whom I refer, :.lion: they disclaims such a view as this, in
his own name and in ihat of " 11,gh ( hurchmen" in general.
Taking then the other alternative—let any one consider the
passages so commonly quoted in controversy from the Ants-
Nicene Fathers (passages at first sight so directly in contra-
diction with important portions of the Creed), and let him
say, if he is able to trust the English Church on so difficult
and historically doubtful a matter as the question whether the
Creeds really express the Church's faith from the Hrst,
what must he not trust the English Church? In a word,
(speaking of external authority only), if we receive this fact
(of the apostolicity of the Creeds) en the authority of the
English Church, so far we do not believe the Creeds to be in-
fallibly true.
ihe way is nos: clear to explain the pass. go in my letter
whnsts are marked with an as..erisk I hey: hen sueless.d
to atknowledge in those passages, that the English Ccuren
witnesses these doctrines in the same sense in villich the
Ronan Catholic (Aural witnesses them ; that itt, that she