The object, then, being thus simplified, we need not here pause to estimate the excellences or defects of any of the formularies which we all alike have thought to be good enough to _sign_. With more than judicial fairness, Dr. STANLEY admits that the whole Thirty-nine Articles are “incomparably superior” to the “Nine Articles of the Evangelical Alliance” (p. 11), or any that would be drawn up by “the dominant factions” of our Church, _or Commonwealth_. But this kind of criticism may well be postponed till the prior question is disposed of—whether we should “sign” _any_ thing? When the Articles and Prayer-book come to be hereafter discussed, these details may have interest with some, as parts of the literature of the “_Eighteenth Century_;” but at present might it not be disrespectful merely to glance at them in a sketchy way, to give pungency and interest to a somewhat barren subject? I do not say that the highly rhetorical sentences in which praise and blame are judiciously administered by Dr. STANLEY to Article 1, 5, 9, or 34, contribute nothing to the effectiveness of the pamphlet with the “general reader;” but it is obvious that with the argument, strictly speaking, they have nothing to do.
The Relaxation of Subscription appears, as far as I can gather, to be urged by three arguments,—the first founded the _origin_ of the “Subscriptions” among us after the Reformation; the second, on the alleged absence of “Subscription” in the Primitive Church; and the third on the practical evils of the present state of “Subscription” in the Church and in the Universities. If I examine each of these, I shall not, I think, have omitted any point hitherto prominently alleged in this controversy.
I. “The Church of England, as such, recognises absolutely no Subscriptions.” Such is Dr. STANLEY’S proposition (p. 38). The tests of membership are “incorporated in the Services to the exclusion, as it would seem, of all besides.” It is added (p. 39)—“These other obligations were, in fact, _not contemplated_ at the time of the first compilation of the Prayer-book and Articles, and have grown up as a mere excrescence through the pressure of political and ecclesiastical parties. The Articles were not subscribed (by anything like general usage) till the 12th year of Elizabeth; they were then, after much hesitation and opposition, ordered to be subscribed for a special purpose,” &c.