of the new Creed, some refractory Divines in the diocese of Worcester maintained a controversy against it, which was afterwards published, and is still extant (1o). Now if we compare the Articles contained in this publication with those which appeared under authority, we seem accurately to gain the object of our pursuit. We thus perceive, that the additions to them in the last instance were numerous; that, neglecting slighter shades of difference, they were at first almost wholly limited to the more striking errors of Popery; and that some of the topics, which I propose to discuss, existed not in the original composition ("). One circumstance perhaps is deserving of particular notice. When reviewed and augmented, a passage directly militating against the Lutheran opinion of Consubstantiation was inserted; but, as if an anxiety had been demonstrated to preserve a conformity in other respects, many of the augmentations upon points of doctrine at the same time introduced were not only of a Lutheran tendency, but couched in the very expressions of the Lutheran Creed.

Considering them therefore even in their rude outline, but more particularly in their

perfect state, we discover, that, in various parts of their composition, Cranmer studiously kept in view that boast of Germany and pride of the Reformation, the Confession of Augsburgh. Prudent, cautious, and steady in his attachments, fearful of extremes, and distrustful of novelties, he principally turned his eye to that favourite quarter, from which the ray of truth had originally proceeded, and where it still shone with undiminished lustre. But to descend into a minute comparison of the two productions would lead me too far from my purpose; it seems sufficient to notice the fact of a manifest resemblance between them, which in some instances amounts to a direct transcript of whole passages, in others to the adoption only of leading sentiments and peculiar phraseology (12). And if upon one individual point a plain deviation occurs, it should be recollected, that this is one, of which the Author of the Augsburgh Confession was himself suspected.

Hitherto I have endeavoured to shew with what principles our Articles preserved a consonancy, as they were framed in the reign of Edward. It will be of importance in the next place to point out, that, from

these, those, which were ratified by his successor, but slightly varied, and that, where any variation is to be found, it appears to have been taken from a similar source; a circumstance, which, if capable of proof, will strongly confirm the position, which I endeavour to establish.

When a permanent system of faith was settled by the Clergy assembled in convocation under Elizabeth, the See of Canterbury was filled by Archbishop Parker, who as an antiquary and Saxon scholar still ranks high in the republic of letters (13). Nor as the restorer of our Church did he acquire a less solid, if less brilliant, reputation. Called by the providence of God to rebuild the walls of our Zion, rudely subverted by Papal bigotry, he neglected not the revered materials of the former fabric. After the revival of our Liturgy, his attention was directed to the consideration of speculative questions and here the temperate proceedings of the Assembly, which discussed them, seemed perfectly to correspond with his most sanguine wishes. Instead of entering upon the task of innovation, instead of bringing forward a new code of doctrines, which some might have thought more adapted to the im

proved state of religious taste and sentiment, the Convocation was satisfied to tread in a beaten path; it not only made the articles of Cranmer the basis of the proposed system, but adopted them in general word for word. Of what was the intention in this respect no testimony can be more conclusive, than the evidence of the original document itself, which is still preserved with the signatures of the Clergy annexed to it, and which is nothing more than an interlined and amended copy of the formulary, which had been adopted in the preceding reign (14).

Whatsoever then might have been the dispositions of a few over-zealous men, the members of this important convention displayed a remarkable proof of their moderation and judgment, by generally reviving what had been before established, rather than, in order to gratify the restless spirit of innovation, by inculcating novel doctrines. Instead of increasing the number of the Articles, they diminished them; instead of extending their sense, so as to make them embrace a greater proportion of speculative tenets, they contracted them, and appeared in every case more disposed to extinguish difference of opinion, than to

augment it by adding fuel to a flame, already rising above control. In one or two instances indeed additions, or rather additional elucidations, were admitted. Of the tendency however of these we cannot doubt, when we learn, that, with the exception of one obvious topic alone, they were not original; that they were neither the productions of Parker nor the Convocation; and that they were not borrowed from any Calvinistical or Zuinglian, but from a Lutheran Creed. The Creed to which I allude is the Confession of Wirtemberg, which was exhibited in the Council of Trent the very year, when our own Articles were completely arranged by Cranmer. That their resemblance to this composition should have been hitherto overlooked is the more remarkable, because it seems too visible, one would conceive, to have escaped the notice of the most superficial observer. For it was not confined to a mere affinity of idea, or the occasional adoption of an individual expression; but in some cases entire extracts were copied, without the slightest omission or minutest variation (15).

If then we duly weigh the facts, which have been stated, and the consequences,