OXFORD
37Q
OXFORD
RaBHSall, The Unirersides of Europe in the Middle Agra (Ox-
ford. 1895). II, good bibliography: Ayliffe, .-Incieni and Present
Stale 0/ the Unirersiti/ of Oxford (2 vols., London, 1714); Oxford
Univ. Commission, Sfinutes of Evidence, etc. (Ixjndon. ISSl);
BOABE. Register of the University of Oxford (Oxford, 1885);
LYTE.Wisf. of the Uniiersity of Oxford (London. 1886); Clakk.
The ColUges of Oxford (London. 1891); Oxford Colhge Histories
(Lon<lon, s. d.); Fostkb. Alumni Oxonienses 1715-1886 (London.
18S7); HUBST. Oxford Topography (Oxford. 1899); PxMicalions of
the Oxford Historical Society (Oxford, s. d.); Statula et Decrcta
Unit. Oxon. (Oxford. 1909); Oxford Unirrrsity Calendar (Oxford.
1910-11); GOI.DIE. A Bygone Oxford in The Month (Sept., 18S0);
Camm, The University of Oxford and the Reformation in The Month
(July and August, 1907).
D. 0. Hunter-Blair.
Oxford Movement, The (1833-1845), may be looked upon in two distinrt lifchts. "The conception which lay at its li:Lse". lu-cordinp; to the Royal Com- mission on Eccl(si:i.-ilic;il Discipline, 1906, "was that of the Holy Catliolic Cliurch as a visible body upon earth, bound together by a spiritual but absolute unity, though divided . . . into national and other sections. This conception drew with it the sense of ecclesiastical continuity, of the intimate and unbroken connexion between the primitive Church and the Church of England, and of the importance of the Fathers a-s guides and teachers ... It also tended to empha,size points of communion between those different branches of the Church, which recognize the doctrine or fact of Apostolic Succession" (Report, p. 64). That is the point of view maintained in the "Tracts for the Times" from 1833 to 1841, which gave its familiar name to the "Tractarian" Movement. They originated and ended with J. H. Newman.
But a second, very unlike, account of the matter was put forward by Newman himself in his "Lectures on Anglican Difficulties" of 18.50. There he con- siders that the drift or tendency of this remarkable change was not towards a party in the Establishment, or even towards the first place in it, but away from national divisions altogether. It was meant ulti- mately to absorb "the various English denominations and parties" into the Roman Church, whence their ancestors had come out at the Reformation. And as Newman had been leader in the Anglican phase of the movement, so he opened the way towards Rome, sub- mitted to it in 1845, and made popular the reasoning on which thousands followed his example. There seems no other instance adducible from history of a reUgious thinker who ha,s moulded on permanent lines the institution which he quitted, while assigning causes for its abandonment. But this result was in some measure a consequence of the "anomalous and singular position", as Dean Church allows, held by the English Establishment, since it was legally set up under Elizabeth (Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity, 8 May, 1559)
Lord Chatham brought out these anomalies in a famous epigram. "We have", he remarked, "a Popish Liturgy, Calvinistio articles, and an Arminian clergy." Such differences were visible from the first. "It is historically certain", says J. A. Froudc, "that Elizabeth and her ministers intentionally framed the Church formulas so as to enable every one to use them who would disclaim allegiance to the Pope." When the Armada was scattered and broken, many adher- ents of the old faith appear to have conformed; and their impetus accounts for the rise of a High Anglican party, whose chief representative was Launcelot Andrewes, Bishop of Winchester (1.555-1626). The Anglo-Catholic school was continued by Laud, and triumphed after the Restoration. In 1662 it expelled from the Church, Baxter and the Presbyterians. But from the Revolution in 1688 it steadily declined. The non-juring bishops were wholly in its tradition, which, through obscure by-ways, was handed on from his father to John Keble and so to Hurrell Froude and Newman .
However, the Laudian or Carolinian divines must not be supposed to have ever succeeded in driving out
their Calvinistic rivals, so [lowcrful when (he Thirty-
Nine Articles were drawn up, ;u)d known froni Sliake-
sprare's time :is I'iu'it;[ns (.see M;ilvolio in "Twelfth
Night"). Andrewes liimself, (hough (:ikiiig St.
Augustine ;ind St. Thonuis for his m:islcrs, ilid not
admit the s:icTr(lo(:d doctriiie of the Eiicliarist. At
every period Ha]itism:d l{cgcMci':ilion, .\postolic Suc-
cession, and the Real Presence were open (|ucslions,
not decided one way or another by "the sl;nniiH'iing
lips of ambiguous Formularies". If there was ;i High
Church in power, and if wh;il the .-Xiiiuiiiaiis lield, :is
it was wiltilv s:iid. were ;dl the best livings in Ijiglaiid,
yet C;dviii's theology, wlictljcr :i litde softened by
Archbisho|) VVhitgift or according to the text of the
"In.stitutes", never did involve deprivation. It was
sheltered by the Articles, as Catholic tradition was by
the Prayer Book; and the balance was kept between
conlnidiiig schools of opinion by means of the Royal
SupiciiKicy.
Siiggcsti'd by Thomas Cromwell, .a.sserted in Par- lianieiilary legisl;i(ion under Henry VllI (b'lIU). (his prime :irticle of .\nglieanism made the king supreme lieail of the English Church on earth, and his tribunal the last court of appeal in all cases, spiritual no less than .secular. It has been said of Henry, and is equally true of Edward VI, that he claimed the whole power of the keys. Elizabeth, while riliii(|uisliing (he title of Head and the adniinistr;ition of holy rites, cer- tainly retained and excrciscil lull juri.sdietion over "all persons and all eausrs" within the realm. She ex- tinguished the ani'iriii luir:ni'liy "without any pro- ceeding in any spirit u.il couii ". ,is Macaulay ob.serves, and sill' appointed the urw one. She "tuned (he pulpit", adnionislicd .irrliliishops, and even supplied by her own legal authority defects in the process of episcopal consecration. The Prayer Book itself is an Act of Parliament. "The supreme tribunal of ap- peal, in ecclesia.stical causes, from 15.59 to l.S;i2", we are told, "was that created by 25 Hen. VIII, c. 19, which gave an appeal from the Church Courts to the King in Chancery for lack of justice" (Dodd, Hist. Canon Law, 232). These powers were exercised Ijy the court of delegates; in 1832 they were transferred to the judicial committee of the privy council, whose members may all be laymen; and, if bishops, they do not sit by virtue of their episcopal office but .as the king's advisers. Contrast will drive the matter home. The constituent form of the Catholic Church is the pope's universal jurisdiction (see Florence, Council of; Vatican Council). But the constituent form of the English Church, as establi-shed by Parliament, is the universal jurisdiction of the Crown. In either case there is no appeal from the papal or the royal decision. When Elizabeth broke with the Catholic bishops who would not acknowledge her spiritual headship, and when William III deprived Sancroft and his suffragans who refused the oath of allegiance, a test was applied, dogmatic in 1559, perhaps not less so in 1690, wdiich proves that no cause of exemption can be pleaded against the king when he acts as supreme governor of the Church.
Such is the doctrine often called Erastian, from Erastus, a Swiss theologian (1524-83), who denied to the clergy all power of excommunication. In Eng- land the course of events had run on before Erastus eoidd publish its philosophy. Politicians like Burgh- ley and Walsingham acted on no theory, but drew tlieir inspiration from Henry VIII. The abstract statement of a view which identifies the Church with the nation and subjects both equally to the king, may be found in Hooker, "The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity" (1.594-97). It was vigorously asserted by Selden and the lawyers at all times. During (he cri( i- cal years of the nineteenth century, Arnold, Stanley, and Kingsley were its best known defenders among clergymen. Stanley declared that the Church of England "is by the very conditions of its being neither
