A few extracts of what Anglo-Catholics teach will be sadly illuminating, and show how the leaven of full-blown apostasy is working. How true is the parable of our Lord of the woman hiding leaven in the three measures of meal till the whole was leavened. "In discussing the doctrine of equivocation, as to how far it is lawful on occasion, he maintained, as against those who admit the lawfulness of words literally true but misleading, that the more straightforward principle is that when principles conflict another duty may be more imperative than the duty of truthfulness. But he expressed it thus: ' Make yourself clear that you are justified in deception, and then LIE LIKE A TROOPER." (William George Ward and the Oxford Movement, 1St Edition, p. 30.)
This book was written by the Revd. W. G. Ward's son, the " he " in the extract referring to his father, one of the early leaders of the Oxford Movement.
The Rev. Baring-Gould, author of the well-known hymn, Onward Christian Soldiers, writes:—"The recollection of these events should suffice to prove the mistake of supposing that the Sacred Scriptures, without note or comment, are a sufficient guide to truth; the Bible thus used is not useless only, but dangerous to morality and truth " (Golden Gate, Part I, p. 177.) Does not this extract smack of Rome, which withholds the Bible from the common people? "A faith appealing to the Bible only can find no firm resting place. (On the Use and Abuse of the Bible, Rev. Thomas Robinson, M.A., p. 27.) We may well ask, To what else can we appeal but to the Holy Scriptures? We feel like Peter of old, who said to the Lord, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life" (John 6:6868Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. (John 6:68)).
The next extract will show to what a daring extent the teaching as to the blasphemous doctrine of Transubstantiation can go:- "You will go [to the altar when partaking of Holy Communion] with this one solemn thought ever before your mind, namely that your body is about to become a tabernacle for the most sacred Flesh and Body of Jesus, God Incarnate." (Parish Tracts, Rev. J. H. Buchanan. First Series, No. 10 Confirmation.)
Our last extract shows us that there is very little divergence, if any, between Roman Catholicism and Anglo-Catholicism. "I still feel, that as a matter of doctrine, that is of belief, the difference between what is held by English Churchmen, and what is held by Roman Catholics is infinitesimal." (Rev. T. Mozley, Vol. II, p. 386, 2nd Edition.)
Alas! the Free Churches show the same tendency, and in Scotland ritualistic practices are becoming increasingly common. We can see Scripture being fulfilled under our very eyes, as we note these ominous steps towards open apostasy; not far off, we feel assured.
Side by side with this terrible backsliding we find Rationalism, that is Modernism and Higher Criticism, to use modern terms, rearing its head. It is true that Rome outwardly stands for the fundamentals of the Christian Faith, but alongside with this outward profession, there is the wholesale undermining of them by tradition. It is well known that whilst Modernism is not allowed outwardly by Rome, her priests are very largely modernists, many even totally infidel as to the truths of the Bible.
But in the circle of Protestantism, where freedom of the press is allowed, we have Modernism publicly rearing its head everywhere. The Principals of Theological Colleges, whether at Oxford or Cambridge, or among the Free Churches, are very largely modernistic. Here is seen the subtlety of Satan, for poisoning the stream at its source secures the pollution of the whole course of the stream. To poison the minds of the ordinands means that when they are ordained they will pass on the malignant infection to the congregations they are pledged to feed with the pure, unadulterated Word of God.
A glaring example of what we have just said is found in Dr. Moffatt's Translation, of the New Testament. In his preface to this Translation he writes:- "Once this translation is freed from the influence of the theory of verbal inspiration, these difficulties cease to be formidable." What kind of Bible can we have, if it is not verbally inspired? What confidence can we have in a translator who does not believe the very words of the Lord Jesus? "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, not one jot [the smallest letter in the Greek alphabet] or one tittle [a small mark on a letter to differentiate it from another letter very like it in appearance] shall in no wise pass from the law (embracing the five books of Moses, including Genesis], till all be fulfilled " (Matt. 5:1818For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18)).
If this is not a claim to verbal inspiration, then we do not know the plain meaning of words. The saddest feature is that one denial leads to another, for in denying verbal inspiration of the original Scriptures, Dr. Moffatt denies the very words of our Lord. If He made a mistake, and Dr. Moffatt knew better than our Lord, where is Christianity? The Modernist in that case would be our only authority, and that, no doubt, is what he wanted.
Another lurid sign of the awful spread of this soul-destroying Modernism is the late Professor A. S. Peake's Commentary on the Bible. It contains criticism of every book in the Bible, written by sixty-one men of scholarship, most of them being Principals and Professors of Theological Colleges, and every one of them Modernists. Its writers cover a large field, and are a plain proof of how rotten most of the training of theological students is. Dr. Graham Scroggie well described Peake's Commentary as "sodden with infidelity."
One extract alone will suffice to prove that this description is true. Professor Peake, writing on the Book of Genesis, says, "Apart from internal inconsistencies there are intrinsic incredibilities... much of Gen. 1-2 is of mythical origin; but it has been purified by the religious genius of Israel and the spirit of revelation" (p. 138).
There is no need to labor the point of the infidelity of this quotation. " Internal inconsistencies," " intrinsic incredibilities," "mythical origin," are terms that would destroy the Bible, rob it of its authority, and take from sinful men the only book that can give them hope beyond the grave. The writer told Professor Peake that, if he believed his Commentary, the only honest thing he could do would be to throw his Bible with the utmost contempt at the back of the fire, and give up all pretense of being a Christian. And yet this Professor Peake was the Principal of a Free Church Theological College.