The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-10-29 00:00:00

THE OXFORD TRACTS.--.BISHOP WILSON'S
CHARGE TO THE CLERGY OF CALCUTTA.

(From the Christian Observer.)
A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE
OF CALCUTTA, JULY 6TH, 1838, BY THE RIGHT REV.
DANIEL WILSON, D.D., BISHOP OF CALCUTTA AND
METROPOLITAN.
(Concluded from our last)
We will now take a few more of the propositions, it not
not being necessary to quote those on which there is no con-
troversy.
" That the honour paid to images is very full of peril, in
the case of the uneducated, that is, of the great part of Chris-
tians." . .

" That the received doctrine of purgatory is at variance
with scripture, cruel to the better sort of Christians, and ad-
ministering deceitful comfort to the irreligious."
" That the direct invocation of saints is a dangerous prac-
tice, as tending to give, often actually giving, to creatures
tthe honour and reliance due to the Creator alone."
" That the Roman doctrine of tradition is unscriptural."
What mean such wary qualifications as, "in the case of
the uneducated," " received," and " direct ?"* The extracts
are intended to conciliate the Protestant reader, who had
been alarmed by the statements of the writers in the Chris-
tian Observer, and other evil-minded persons, respecting the
tendency of the Tracts. The strongest detached passages are
therefore extracted in reply ; yet even these strongest pas-
sages are neutralized by saving clauses : and not one of them
removes the impression conveyed by the context. What the
extract from the Tract softly calls " the honour paid to
images," Bishop Hall calls by its true name, •` the worship-
ping images ;" and instead of confining the " peril" of it
to " the uneducated," however numerous, he says, " The
book of God is full of his indignation against the practice ;"
it is " idolatry abominable," nor will he allow in its pallia-
tion that " they worship not the image, but, by it, the person
represented." But to set at rest the question, how far Bi-
shop Hall and the Oxford Tracts agree in this matter, we
will quote a passage from each. The Tract, No. 71, says:—
" The Tridentine Decree declares that it is good and use-
ful suppliantly to invoke the saints, and that the images of
Christ and the blessed virgin, and the other saints, should
receive due honour and veneration;' words which them-
selves go to the very verge of what could be received by the
cautious Christian, though possibly admitting of an honest
interpretation."
Now read the words of Bishop Hall, who, speaking of this
very doctrine of the Tridentine Decrees, says, and in the
very treatise (c. x. sect. 2.), whose " order," certainly not
doctrine, the Tract-writer follows :
" All holy antiquity would have both blushed and spit it
those forms of invocation which the late clients of Rome have
broached to the world." _ _ _

" How would they have digested that blasphemous psalter
of our lady, imputed to Bonaventure, and those styles of
mere deification which are given to her, and the division of
all offices of piety to mankind, betwixt the Mother and the
Son? How had their ears glowed to hear Christus oravit,
Franciseus exoravit ; Christ prayed, Francis prevailed! How
would they have brooked that which Ludovicus Vives freely
confesses, Multi Christiani, &c. ; Many Christians worship
divor divasque, the saints of both sexes, no otherwise than
God himself? Or that which Spalatensis professes to have
observed, that ' the ignorant multitude are carried with more
entire religious affection to the blessed Virgin, than to Christ
their Saviour.' These foul supersLitions are not more hei-
nous than new."

It might have been thought that there was no room for
difference between Hall and the Tract-writers upon the sub-
ject of transubstantiation, which of course they as well as he
abjure ; and yet very remarkable is the difference of argu-
ment in which they address themselves to speak of it. But
we have no space left for quotation, otherwise we could easily
show that eve❑ where they agree with Bishop Hall, they do
not do so upon the grounds of " undoubted Protestantism."
We return to the Bishop of Calcutta. May his lordship
be long spared to see the labour of the Lord prosper in his
hand ; and may our beloved church, through the Divine
mercy, be preserved, not only from avowed enemies, but from
those who, eating her bread, are sapping her foundations,
and, alas ! we fear, perilling the salvation of many souls.

* We might have added the epithet " Roman;" for though,
in the heading of Hall's Lecture, the word " Romish" occurs,
it is not in the sense of distinguishing between tradition as
professed by the Church of Rome, and tradition as contended
for by the Oxford Tract writers; but in the general sense of
making the doctrine of authoritative tradition a Romish doc-
trine. Hall contends, clearly and decisively, against tradi-
tion, whether as a rule without scripture, or a "joint rule"
with it. "It is not to be imagined," he says, " that the same
word of God, which speaks for all other truths, should not
speak for itself. How fully doth it display its own sufficiency
and perfection." lie goes on to refute the notion that it is
" profitable for doctrine," &c., but not " sufficient" without
tradition. It is sufficient, he says, for the teacher; " and
that which can perfect the teacher, is sufficient for the learn-
er." The Oxford Tract writers say that we misrepresent
them, by making them advocate Romish traditions, whereas
they only advocate apostolical or catholic traditions. But
this is not a correct statement. What we do say is, that any
reference to tradition as authority, is Romish, even though
the matter to be proved he apostolical. We do not, nor did
Bishop Hall, make the Oxford Tract distinction about Ro-
mish and Apostolical. He expressly argues that our Saviour
forbad reliance upon tradition as authority, whatever might
be its character or subject-matter. " Our Saviour's chal-
lenge," he says, " is general ; to traditions thus advanced,
not to these or those traditions." We repeat, therefore,
that if the Oxford extract, in using the word Roman, means
thereby to keep an opening for what it calls catholic tradi-
tion, it opposes Hall, who says, " Our Saviour never meant
to compare one tradition with another, as approving some,
rejecting others ; but with indignation complains, that tra-
ditions were obtruded on God's people, in a corrivalty with
the written word, which is the very point now questioned."