The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-07 00:00:00

PUSEYISM ALIAS POPERY.

Numerous applications have been made to the
Archbishop of Canterbury for some explanations of
his opinions respecting the new religion which has
sprung up in the Church, and the .only answer from
the " Primate of all England" has been, " I will take
the subject into my consideration," but nothing more
has been heard of the subject or his Grace's " consi-
deration." We believe the Bishops are at the bottom
of this movement in favour of Catholicism. Every
communication we receive on the subject, and almost
every paragraph we read in the country papers respect-
ing Puseyism, lead i.to the inference that the Pro-
testant Church considers itself unsafe in its present
position, and is preparing the way for the renewal of
the old Catholic rites and ceremonies which have kept
such a vast body of Christians under the dominion of
the Pope of Rome. The Bishops now see that the
Church cannot do without crosses and candles, and
we may add, masses. The beginning is every-
thing. Pusey and Newman begin with auricular
confession, purgatory, and all but transubstantiation.
In what, then, do they differ from the Church of
Rome ? In absolutely nothing. And when the
watchmen on the towers of Zion are, called upon to
protect the people, they reply, " All is well." While
the Church of England is in commotion on this
question, while the Protestant people of this country
are in alarm for the security of the faith established
at the Reformation, their Archbishops, and Bishops,
and Deans, and prebendaries, and the whole race of
_idle Protestant monks and friars, remain undisturbed,
apparently looking forward to the " revival" of that
ancient worship which they once denounced as the
sacrifice of the Babylonish woman. In no instance
has there been, on the part of`the Church, any disap-
probation of the course pursued by these Catholic inno-
vators. The two Archbishops are silent, and the Bishop
of London, their representative, speaks for them, and
he speaks, of course, in character. Was there ever
any answer so characteristic of the Jesuit as the fol-
lowing to the " Marylebone Tradesmen and Opera-
tives' Association ?" He, of course, had heard no
at all of " doctrines opposed to the Articles of
our Church," though all except the Puseyites had
heard of them with dismay :
_

Lyndon House, Feb. 1, 1842.

Sin-I have to acknowledge the receipt of a memo-
rial which you have transmitted to me, signed by you
on behalf of 'The Marylebone Tradesmen and Opera-
tives' Protestant Association ;' in which it is stated that
in certain places of worship within the borough of
Marylebone, you ' have witnessed ceremonies not en-
joined by the Rubric, and have heard doctrines opposed
to the Articles of our Church;' and lam called upon to
take such measures in this matter as may seem to me
most advisable.'
I have, to state, in answer, that, upon a general alle-
gation of this nature, no measures can be grounded ;
but that, if any particular instance of departure from
the Rubric, or of opposition to the Articles of our
Church, is brought under my notice, it will be my duty
to inquire into the circumstances of the case.
I remain, Sir, your obedient servant,
Mr. R. H. Binden. C. J. LONDON.
The address of the Bishop of 'Worcester, brother of
the. late Lord Chancellor, to a Puseyite clergyman of
Birmingham, is even more alarming, because this
excellent man ,is no Jesuit, and we may, therefore,
preSume speaks the real sentiments of the Church.
lie evidently has no fear of crosses or genuflexions,
or obeisances, and seems disinclined at present to fol-
low the. old practices, only because they may offend
weak consciences. Why do not the whole body meet
in Convocation, and declare at once for joining the
Church of Rome ? The Puseyite clergyman referred
to, the Rev. J. Oldknow, Minister of Trinity Chapel,
had been in the habit of kneeling down before the
cross, and btwing to it, and performing other Popish
rites. The Bishop of Worcester, in a letter to the
wolf in sheep's clothing, thus admonishes him. We
think the admonition savours more of praise than
blame :

Palace, Worcester, Jan. 19th, 1842.
REV:. Silt—My attention has been called to certain
letters in the Birmingham Advertiser, wherein it is al-
leged, that in one of the churches in Birmingham, a
'gilt cross has . been introduced upon the communion
table-clothi.and that the officiating clergyman is in the
habit'of kneeling down before this cross, on hii way to
the reading desk, and of bowing to it, on returning to
it, after the prayers and the sermon. Not knowing to
whom these letters referred, I wrote to Mr. Garbett, the
Rural Dean, and requested that he would make the
necessary inquiries. I now learn from him that you are
the individual who has given such cause of offence ; and
I think it therefore my duty to request your attention to
the following obiervations.
Without entering into the question of h9w far the in-
troduction of such novelties may be justified by the prac-
.tice of antiquity, I Would wish you seriously to consider
whether they are of such importance as to justify the de-
struction of unity in the Church, which must be the ne-
cessary consequence. The mere display of the Cross, as
a symbol of our Christian profession, may indeed be a
matter of indifference; and I lately declined ordering one
to be removed, as I was requested to do, from one of the
churches which I have recently consecrated at Rugby;
but I then said that I would certainly do so, if I after-
wards found that it led to idolatrous or superstitious
practices. Now I firmly believ&that yott do not worship
the Cross in the sense in which the Roman Catholics are
said to da so; but if you, do not, you cannot attach any
religious importance to its display in your Church, or to
the genuflexions and obeisances which, without any di-
rection from the Rubric, you are in the habit of making
before it; and if these be things indifferent, where is the
prudence of" troubling the consciences of those who are
rightly religious," bkadopting practices in themselves in-
different, but which you know will give cause of offence
.to. others?

There is one, other point which I wish to press upon
your attention. Granting that various modes of Divine
worship may, for various reasons, have become obsolete,
which may yet have been the practice of the Primitive
Church, and even directed by some of our Rubrics or
Canons, who is to decide upon the propriety of their
being again revived? Is every indi‘idual minister to
take this upon himself ? or does it not more properly
.belong to those who are placed in authority? and may it
not be inferred, from their silence, that they consider
such a revival inexpedient, or at least indifferent?
I have received the little pamphlet which I con-
'elude you sent me;* and though to comment upon
the whole of it would exceed the compass of a letter,
I cannot refrain from observing, that when you under-
take that you will " conform to the Book of Com-
mon Prayer," the object of requiring this declaration
from you is to secure the use of the general form of
the Morning and Evening Prayer, and administration
of the two Sacraments, in opposition to other forms, or
to the extemporaneous composition of the minister. Essen-
tial and honest conformity is here meant, not a scrupu-
lous adherence to petty ceremonies, which time may have
rendered obsolete, and which the law authorities of the
Church had never required the restoration.
I have written more at length upon this subject than
is perhaps required by our relative positions ; because I
am anxious to use the language of remonstrance, instead
of authority; that of a father to an indiscreet son; or, if
you will, that of a senior Presbyter to a very young one,
who yet has taken upon himself, without authority from
his Bishop, to introduce practices which, if they ever
prevailed in the Church, have long since fallen into de-
suetude.
In conclusion, I will refer you to an authority older
than it,iy that the utmost admirer of antiquity can pro-
duce. St. Paul distinctly asserts that there was no sin
in eating meat which had been offered to idols ; still, he.
.directs the Corinthians to abstain from such a practice,
out of consideration of the consciences of others—