The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-12-30

thereformation which, from well known causes,
was not made thorough in England in the SIX
teenth century,
Our brethren of the Churchman, quoting
the main part of this paragraph. ask in reply;
why did not the Central Presbyterian, In
stead of asking this question, and taking for
granted such an enormous assumption, prore
it? This would have been the tight way A
fearful charge is brought against us by this
fallacious method, and not the first sign OF
proof, even so much as limited at We think
we have just reason to complain OF such a
method of augmentation.
We did not suppose there was any necessity
for proving our affirmation, presented inter
negatively since we did not know how far and
by whom its correctness would be challenged
AS the issue is now made, we are prepared to
state the grounds upon which our remarks
rested, and submit them for public judgment.
The first part Of our affirmation, viz: that
it is prevalent opinion outside of the Epis-
copal Church, that at the time of the Refor
nation decided leaven of Popery was left in
it-no one, we suppose, will dispute; so let it
pass We also said that such was 1.-The opin-
ion of not few within it. Is not this state
ment correct?
Let us begin by referring to modern writer,
but recently deceased. The name of Isaac
Taylor is known over the Christian world, and
is known as devoted son of the Church OF
England. In one of his later works, An
cient Christianity, against the famous coz
ford Tracts, we find him using very decided
language on the point in hand. In his "cr-
cumstances of the argument" or introduction,
he speaks Of a certain class in the Church OF
England as the political advents and cham
pions of the Establishment, 'oho admire, not so
much the tenderness Of our English reformers
toloard R6pe,y, as their ObStQuious discretion
an regard to the Tadors, and who as children
of this world, and fond of tinsel, have always
looked upon the trammels of Church subser-
viency, as trappings of honor" &c.
Again he says: Fatal concessions were
made, and dangerous compromises submitted
to by the fathers of the English Church. under
the despotism of the Tudors, and these very
errors unavoidable, perhaps,) are no,o become
the untopard Inheritance of the champions OF
the Protestant establishment.
Again he says: "What the English re-
formers had in view, was ANCIENT CHRISTIAN
ITY, or the doctrine, and discipline aud ritual
of the Nicene age, and of the times nearly
preceding that age; and so far as the altered
condition of the social system, and so far as
the secular despotisne dllO,oed them to follow
their corrections, they realised their idea, and
probably would have done so to the extent OF
close imitation, had 1t been possible, of all
but the more offensive features of that early
system"
Now, it will be all important to inquire when,
how, and by whom the English Reformation
was thus trammelled, and perverted from its
legitimate purpose. This will lead us to the
times of Queen Elizabeth. The testimony Of
the Reformers themselves will be brought in
as conclusive on this question. 1t will then
remain to be shown that the Church of Eng
land, in every essential respect stands now
precisely where she stood at the death Of that
celebrated sovereign Or, if we may here
state the position in the language of the Bish-
op of Sodor and Mann Or. Short in his re-
cent, and excellent "Sketch of the Church of
England" let it be as follows:
The kingdom has, for the last two hun
bred years, been making rapid strides in every
species of improvement, and a corresponding
alteration in the laws on every subject has
taken place; during this period nothing has
been remedied III the Church"