learning or character now entered into combat with a Churchman. On the authority of Peter Heylin, it was shown that the Scotch minister, Henderson, was so worsted in argument by King Charles I, that he took a fit of melancholy, went home and died.

The Archdeacon declared his belief in salvation by works in the sense that something must be done by man in order to be saved. In Adam all died, but by baptism all are brought into a new state. Though men cannot do works pleasing and acceptable to God without the grace of the Spirit, yet they can with the help of baptismal grace. Eternal life is the gift of God, on condition of faith, repentance and obedience, 'works so performed have something to do with the sinner's acceptance before God.'1 The seventeenth article, as Bishop Tomline has shown, was written against the theology of Calvin. Peter Heylin had recorded that Cranmer refused the intervention of Calvin in the work of the Reformation in England, and as to the Lambeth Articles, though sanctioned by Archbishop Whitgift, Queen Elizabeth threatened him with a præmunire if he dared to publish them. Daubeny's position was summed up by a writer in the Christian Observer thus: 'There may be a true Church without religion, and religion without a true Church.' Another writer defined it, 'That there might be a true Church in which the word of God was not preached.'

The Archdeacon had committed all members of NonEpiscopal Churches to the uncovenanted mercies of God. But the sound of this was more terrible than the reality, as the uncovenanted mercies were almost as good or hardly inferior to those of the covenant, for the benefits of Christ's death were as extensive as Adam's fall, so that multitudes might be saved through Christ who had never heard His name.' 2

Overton defended the Evangelical clergy not only from the animadversions of High Churchmen, but from those of the more rational party. In this, the only point of interest was the question of subscription. The Evangelical as well as the High Church clergy professed to take the Articles in their literal and natural sense, as intended by those who p. 199.

wrote them, though they differed as to what was the real sense. The rational Clergy admitted that they did not receive them in the sense of the compilers, but claimed a right for themselves and others to qualify their subscription.

Paley had said 'Those who contend that nothing less can justify subscription to the Articles than the actual belief of each and every separate proposition contained in them, must suppose that the legislature expected the consent of ten thousand men, and that in perpetual succession, not to one controverted proposition, but to many hundreds.'1 Dr Powell of Cambridge said that 'As new discoveries have sprung up, explanations have to be gradually framed and adopted.' Dr Hey said the forms might be left in words but altered in meaning, in which case it may be either said that they grow obsolete or that the law which enjoins them is tacitly repealed, and a tacit repeal is of equal value with an express one. The literal sense of every form can be the true sense only while it is new; it gets a new and acquired sense. He showed how the divines of the eighteenth century had gradually come into opposition to the doctrine of the Article on justification by faith. Bishop Shipley said there had been such 'improvements' as entirely reformed the doctrine of the Church. George Croft, a writer, quoted as an authority at that time, said that the Articles certainly favoured enthusiasm, and he did not wonder that they generated Evangelicals and Calvinists. Against all such, Overton said in the words of Strype, that the doctrines of the Articles were 'interwoven with industry into the forms of public worship.' Moreover, the very Convocation which framed the Articles declared their object to be the 'avoiding of diversities of opinion and the establishing of concord touching the true religion, and the Royal Declaration forbids varying or departing from them in the least degree or offering any new sense on any Article.

The question of the Calvinism of the Church of England' had been discussed by Dr Laurence in his Bampton Lectures It was revived in 1822 by the publication of Reformation Documents.2 The Anti-Calvinists rested mainly on the documents of the time of Henry which Cranmer sanctioned. Those who took the other side doubted if they expressed

Cranmer's real sentiments. These are found in the documents of Edward's time, when Cranmer's influence was greater than it had been in the previous reign. The contrast is seen in several passages. The Institution of a Christian Man' says By the sacrament of baptism men obtain remission of their sins, the grace and favour of God-so that children dying in infancy shall be saved thereby and else not,' again by virtue of this holy sacrament men and children obtain grace and remission.' On the other hand, the Reformatio Legum' says 'their scrupulous superstitions must be considered as impious who tie together the grace of God and the Holy Spirit with the elements of the Sacrament as openly to affirm that no child born of Christian parents can attain salvation who shall be carried away by death before he can have been brought to baptism, which we hold to be far otherwise.'. Again in Edward's Catechism, where the discourse is of justification by faith, it is said, ' which thing baptism represents and puts before our eyes, namely that we are by the Spirit of God regenerate and cleansed from sin-water signifies the Spirit. Baptism is also a figure of our being buried with Christ.'

The sentiments of Cranmer and Ridley are nowhere definitely expressed. Bradford was a decided Predestinarian, and sent a treatise to Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer when they were in prison for their approval, which being obtained, says Strype, the rest of the divines in and about London were ready to subscribe it also.

CHAPTER III

SIMEON, ROWLAND HILL, ROBINSON, ISAAC AND JOSEPH MILNER, HAWEIS, LEGH RICHMOND, WILBERFORCE, HANNAH MORE

THE Evangelical serious or earnest clergy, as they were called by their followers, the fanatics and enthusiasts, as they were called by those who opposed them, were more conspicuous for their personal influence than for any depth or originality of theological speculation. Their religion rested mainly on feeling and experience. It was enthusiasm in the proper and literal sense-God working within. Yet they were never deficient in the dogmatic spirit. Few have been more persistent in maintaining that religion and their special dogmas were inseparable.

Evangelical theology has always been more or less the theology of Calvin, but this has been gradually d1ppearing, and now is found, where it is found at all, only in a mitigated form. The spirit too has in some measure changed. It is not so dogmatic as it once was. The lisping Ephraimite is not so closely watched, and sometimes it is admitted that there may be other interpretations of the Christian faith.

The Evangelical movement had its origin in the last century. Those who were living at the beginning of this belonged to the second or third generation. The most prominent of these was Charles Simeon,' who for a long life-time was a great spiritual power in Cambridge and throughout England. His first text and the great theme of all his ser

Cranmer's real sentiments. These are found in the documents of Edward's time, when Cranmer's influence was greater than it had been in the previous reign. The contrast is seen in several passages. The Institution of a Christian Man' says By the sacrament of baptism men obtain remission of their sins, the grace and favour of God-so that children dying in infancy shall be saved thereby and else not,' again by virtue of this holy sacrament men and children obtain grace and remission.' On the other hand, the Reformatio Legum' says 'their scrupulous superstitions must be considered as impious who tie together the grace of God and the Holy Spirit with the elements of the Sacrament as openly to affirm that no child born of Christian parents can attain salvation who shall be carried away by death before he can have been brought to baptism, which we hold to be far otherwise.'. Again in Edward's Catechism, where the discourse is of justification by faith, it is said, ' which thing baptism represents and puts before our eyes, namely that we are by the Spirit of God regenerate and cleansed from sin—water signifies the Spirit. Baptism is also a figure of our being buried with Christ.'

The sentiments of Cranmer and Ridley are nowhere definitely expressed. Bradford was a decided Predestinarian, and sent a treatise to Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer when they were in prison for their approval, which being obtained, says Strype, the rest of the divines in and about London were ready to subscribe it also.