ON THE MEANS OF PROMOTING THE STUDY

OF THEOLOGY.

Ir has been stated, though perhaps it may be difficult to determine with what exact degree of truth, that, at the bishops' examination for Holy orders, the candidates from our theological colleges, as St. Beghs and St. Aidans, acquit themselves more satisfactorily than those from the two great English Universities. Considering that still by far the larger proportion of clergy are educated at Oxford and Cambridge,—that these two great national seats of education possess advantages for disseminating learning unrivalled by any other institution in the world,—we may well ask, Are the Universities content that thus it should be? Are they content that there should be a continual complaint that the clergy, as a whole, whom they send forth, are deficient in a thoroughly sound knowledge of theology? Something surely ought to be done, and by them, if they wish still to hold that honourable position which they have so long held, of being the educators and instructors, not only of the nobility and gentry of England, but also of the clergy, the spiritual guides and teachers of England. It is our desire, in no dogmatic or captious spirit, but simply out of the sincere and hearty love which we bear to the Church of England, to sketch in outline something like a scheme which we think the Universities might adopt for the furtherance and promotion of theological learning.

At present, the amount of theological knowledge required at Oxford is about as small as it can possibly be. The four Gospels in Greek are alone required at Moderations. Add to this, for the final examination, the Acts of the Apostles, the Old and New Testament History, the Articles, with Scripture proofs, and we have the sum total of divinity required for the degree of Bachelor of Arts, whether the candidates be pass-men or class-men. There are, undoubtedly, able lectures delivered by the Divinity professors, on Hebrew, on Ecclesiastical History, on Pastoral Theology; and a certificate of attendance at one, if not two, of these courses of lectures, is required by most of the bishops; but what amount of knowledge the student has gained from the lectures-whether he has really gained any at all-there is no test whatever. A certificate of attendance alone is required.

Now, there have been, for the last fifteen years, at Oxford, three separate schools, through one of which, in addition to the classical school, every undergraduate must pass before he can

attain his degree.* These three schools are, as is commonly known, the schools of Mathematics, of Natural Science, and of Law and History. Why should there not be a Divinity School, which the student might have the option of passing, as he has now the option out of the other three? Would there not be many who in all probability, especially if they had any intention of taking holy orders, would pass through this school out of preference? Would not the bishops (supposing that the system worked well) require the candidates from the University of Oxford to have passed this school before they present themselves for ordination?

That classes should be given in this, just as in the other schools-that a first or second-class man in divinity should be considered to have gained an equal honour and distinction with a first or second-class man in law or in natural science-would be highly desirable; and thus the standard in theological knowledge might be kept quite as high as the standard in other subjects. If a man were required, either for a pass or a class, to know as much about theology as he is now required to know about law and history at Oxford, it assuredly would be a great gain.

What books and subjects should be chosen in the wide field of theology, it would be presumptuous in us to dictate; but a thorough mastery of the original text of the New Testament (half of which is supposed to have been already mastered in the previous classical examination), and a sound knowledge of the Evidences, of the history of the first three centuries, and of the period of the Reformation, is indispensable. Something like this we would desire for the mere pass-examination. For honours, there might be a most abundant choice of reading. The original language of the Old Testament might most advantageously be included, and recommended, though perhaps not demanded as a necessity. The Septuagint likewise might be added to the list. But, in the history of the Christian Church -the influences which it has exercised in all ages for good or for evil-the birth, the growth, the extinction of heresies-the rise and rapid development of almost universal darkness and error-the perpetual protest, from some quarter or other, against this error,-what instructive and useful lessons are afforded here! An acquaintance, too, with some of the best of the Fathers-as Irenæus, or Augustine, or Ambrose, or Chrysostom-together with some of the ablest writers of our own Church, especially of the Reformation period, would do much to open men's eyes to things of which too many are at present ignorant, and which they care not to examine. Yet, surely,

*By a recent statute of the University, those who have taken a first, second, or third class in the Final Classical School are exempted from any further examination.

the clergy ought to know the doctrines of the Church, as taught by her best and noblest servants in the purest ages; and they ought to know the doctrines of that reformed branch of the Church-the Church of England, to which they belong-the doctrines of those who reformed her, and who, for the most part, composed and compiled her formularies.

We do feel that at present there is a lamentable negligence, if not ignorance, of the literature of the Reformation. Too many are content with the mere outlines of its history. To read the Reformers themselves, to study and digest them, is what few attempt, and perhaps few have time for, amid their parochial visits, and the composition of two or three sermons a week. Yet some knowledge of the writings of the Reformers is absolutely necessary for rightly understanding the doctrines of the Church of England-the feelings which animated those who reformed her.

Well would it be for some of those that flatter themselves that they are the best Churchmen who, by tinsel decorations and flaming altar-lights, bring the services of the Church of England as near as they can to the ritual of Rome, to have marked and learned such a passage as the following from the sermons of brave old Latimer:-"Where the devil is resident and hath his plough going, there away with books, and up with candles away with bibles, and up with beads: away with the light of the Gospel, and up with the light of candles, yea, at noon-days. Where the devil is resident, that he may prevail, up with all superstition and idolatry, censing, painting of images, candles, palms, ashes, holy water, and new service of men's inventing, as though man could invent a better way to honour God with than God himself hath appointed. Down with Christ's cross, up with purgatory pick-purse—the popish purgatory, I mean. Away with clothing the naked, the poor, and impotent; up with decking of images and gay garnishing of stocks and stones. Up with man's traditions and his laws, down with God's traditions and His most Holy Word."*

Dr. Arnold, in reference to Tractarian views and practices, has said, "I call all this Judaizing a direct idolatry—it is exalting the Church and the sacraments into the place of Christ, as others have exalted His mother, and others, in the same spirit, exalted circumcision. We, too, cannot but wish that they who use language very like popery about the holy communion should, before they take orders, have read and pondered such sentences as these, which we again quote from Latimer:

"Then let us trust upon His only death, and look for none other sacrifice propitiatory, than the same bloody sacrifice, the * Latimer, Sixth Sermon on the Plough. Parker Society's edit., pp. 70, 71. + Dr. Arnold's Letter to Rev. J. Hearne, p. 152.

lively sacrifice and not the dry sacrifice, but a bloody sacrifice. For Christ himself said, consummatum est-It is perfectly finished. I have taken at my Father's hand the dispensation of redeeming mankind. I have wrought man's redemption, and dispatched the matter. Why, then, mingle ye Him? Why do ye divide Him? Why make you of Him more sacrifices than one. Paul saith, Pascha nostrum immolatus est Christus.-Christ our passover is offered. So that the thing is done, and Christ hath done it, and done it semel, once for all; and it was a bloody sacrifice, not a dry sacrifice. Why, then, it is not the mass that availeth or profiteth for the quick and dead."*

By thus instituting a Divinity school similar to the schools of Mathematics, Natural Science, and Law and History, and compelling men to read some good sound first-class divines, we think Oxford might do much for the encouragement of a theologically educated clergy; and surely the bishops would give their assistance by requiring candidates from that university to have passed through this Divinity school, as now nearly all of them require Cambridge men to have passed the Voluntary.

It may be urged by some, that the voluntary theological examination at Cambridge has not been productive of the fruits that were expected-that many have, upon the whole, pronounced it a failure. That there is plenty of room for improvement at Cambridge, we are thoroughly aware; and we are not quite sure whether it might not be advisable that men should be allowed to proceed to their degree after taking honours in divinity, as they are now allowed after taking honours in classics, without passing the mathematical examination. To have passed a really searching examination in theology necessarily implies a fair acquaintance with classics, and it would be perfectly easy for the university to insist upon the candidates bringing up one Latin and one Greek Christian author at least in addition to the Greek Testament.

At this time, when there are hundreds of parishes needing additional clergymen, and when the supply is by no means equal to the demand, the bishops are almost forced to be content with the proficiency which the universities afford. They cannot help themselves. They cannot make a man learn more than the universities profess to teach. They are obliged to accept, as thankfully as they may, the standard of theology which the university has required. What, in fact, can they do if they are not content? They may reject a man on the ground that he is not duly prepared; but where are they to send him in order that he may be duly prepared? They can

* Latimer's Sermons, pages 73, 74.

not send him back to the university; the university has passed him. They can only advise him to read with some experienced clergyman, or enter some theological college, where he shall receive better instruction. And what is this but confessing that the university has granted a degree to one who, on account of his theological ignorance, does not deserve it?

Let, then, those who feel the importance of this weighty matter at the universities take it in hand. Neither Oxford nor Cambridge has been afraid, of late years, of promulgating changes in the examination statutes. Can they deny, but Oxford more particularly, that there is great need of change and reformation here?

In making these remarks, we are not for a moment forgetful that there are other requirements for an able and successful minister of the Gospel, apart from which knowledge availeth nothing. We are sure that he who studiously uses his Bible, and seeks for wisdom from above, will be by far the best minister. Yet, thoroughly to understand the Word, is necessary before a man can truly dispense the Word; and the Bible ought to be studied by a clergyman, or one who purposes to be a clergyman, with all the help that philological, historical, and antiquarian works afford.* To the universities we turn for help we entreat them more heartily to labour for that which they continually ask of God, when they pray that whatever tends in them "to the advancement of sound religion or useful learning may for ever flourish and abound." To each of them we would say, "Arise! for this matter belongeth unto thee: we will also be with thee: be of good courage, and do it."+ T. C. O.

CORRESPONDENCE.

POOR BENEFICES.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

DEAR SIR,-In your May number, under the article "Public Affairs," you have the following passage:

Already the commissioners have discovered that they have it in their power, by a rigid economy in other matters, to raise all livings under £300 a-year, having a population of 4000, to that sum as their minimum; and in four or five years from the present time, the clergy are promised that all benefices, whatever their population may be, shall be raised to £300 a-year."

I am sorry to say that all that the commissioners hope to accomplish in five years is to raise unconditionally to £300 a-year the income of every benefice in public patronage which now exists, and has,

* Vide Dr. Arnold's Letter to T. F. Ellis, Esq., p. 86. + Ezra x. 4.