On the contrary, the editors affirm that "faith in Christ is imputed to us for righteousness; faith itself, not a righteousness proposed as a subject of faith."* If so, then how are we justified by his merits, or, as St Paul elsewhere says, by his name? or how is he made to us not only sanctification but righteousness? or what becomes of his name, The LORD our RIGHTEOUSNESS ? Much more to the purpose are the observations of Professor Hodge upon the 4th chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. From the general excellence of this elaborate volume, we the more regret this unhappy and, to us, essential blemish. A. T. R. ART. VI.-The Revision of the Prayer Book. Church and State Two Hundred Years ago. 1862. Church Life in Australia. By T. BINNEY. By JOHN STOUGHTON. By the Rev. D. MOUNTFIELD, Lord EBURY's Speech. May Liturgia Recusa. By AQUILA DE RUSSE. (Richard Bingham, M.A., Incumbent of Queenborough, Kent.) THE first work in our list is a valuable addition to the history of ecclesiastical affairs in England. By a careful examination of the journals of Parliament, Mr Stoughton has corrected many of the errors committed by Clarendon, Burnet, and Kennet. From the fresh materials which have been brought to light in the State Paper Department of Her Majesty's Public Record Office, from the letters intercepted at the Post-Office, and similar sources, he has made use of information which was unknown to Macaulay and Hallam. The lecture by Mr Mountfield contains a succinct and popular account of the schismatial Act of Uniformity, which came into operation on Bartholomew's Day 1662; the other works detail some of the attempts which are in progress to repair the breach which was then made. We are greatly indebted to the Bishop of Adelaide for his letter on the Union of Protestant Evangelical Churches; and though the idea which he has sketched of a church of the future, which is to conciliate all affections and unite all diversities, is one which no one can seriously entertain, we are truly thankful that the visit of Mr Binney to Australia was the means of eliciting a proposition which may issue in some real visible union, without any compromise of principle. * Page 382. On the present occasion we purpose to limit ourselves to one of the many points involved in the fatal disastrous reactionary Act of Uniformity of 1662, viz., the declaration imposed on all who are ecclesiastically regarded as having care of souls,-i.e., on vicars and rectors, but not necessarily on curates, canons, archdeacons, deans, bishops. The reformers in the time of Edward VI. and Elizabeth intended that the English Church should exemplify the noble maxim of Chillingworth," The Bible, and the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants." The Caroline rulers willed that it should be otherwise, and laid down the principle,-" The Prayer Book, and the Prayer Book only, is the religion of Churchmen." The declaration is as follows: "I do declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the Book of Common Prayer." Every portion of this declaration is singularly vague and uncertain. It is not easy to say what is contained in, and what is prescribed by, the Book of Common Prayer. In what sense are we to understand the words, "unfeigned assent and consent?" We may assume that the coronation service formed no part of the bock. We ought to know whether the declaration referred to the State services recently framed as well as those for ordering of priests and deacons, for the consecration of bishops, and all the offices which are printed in modern editions of the Prayer Book. Nor is it easy to say what is prescribed therein. One might suppose that daily service is really enjoined on every minister in public or private, except hindered by sickness or other urgent cause! But, to judge by the practice of 90 or 95 per cent. of the clergy, we must presume that this is an erroneous inference. But if there is difficulty in determining what is contained and what is prescribed, still greater is the perplexity in endeavouring to ascertain the precise meaning of "unfeignedassent and consent." Bishop Morley said to an ejected minister, "You must not philosophise upon the words assent and consent; no more was intended than that the person so declaring intended to use the book." But this explanation did not satisfy this worthy minister; he felt probably as Philip Henry expressed himself, "Oaths are edged tools, and not to be playedwith." The real import of the words is very debateable; for although from the title of the Act of Uniformity it might be fairly argued that the declaration aimed solely at the use of the Liturgy, there can be no doubt that the word use was designedly left out in the form of words, in order that those who conformed might declare their approbation of all and every thing, ad animum imponentis ecclesiæ. We are shut up to this opinion by the proceedings in the House of Lords, (July 25-27. 1663), when, on a proposition being made that the terms assent and consent meant nothing more than practice and obedience, the Duke of York, at the head of twelve lay Lords, protested against the alteration, declaring it to be destructive of the Church of England as by law established. (Stoughton, pp. 282, 296). There can be no doubt that the Caroline revisionists intended that this declaration should have the effect and validity of a creed; that the subscribers should express their approbation of the changes made in the Liturgy, and virtually say, "All these I stedfastly believe." The alterations made in the Book of Common Prayer were no less than 600 in number, and were completed within a month from the time that the king's letter was read authorising the convocation to proceed in the matter. Sheldon and his associates had resolved upon their measures, which were formed, as Dr Cardwell admits, from "a distinct and settled desire to exclude the Puritans from the Church," and all must allow that "the time was too short for the revision."—(Luthbury, History of Convocation, p. 390.) That this declaration was intended to have the force of a creed will appear by the further consideration, that sufficient security for the use of the Prayer Book had already been taken by the second article of the 36th canon, which is subscribed by all who are admitted to holy orders. This article has the same calm, judicious, but decided tone, in which it is declared that holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, viz., the Book of Common Prayer containeth nothing contrary to the word of God, and may lawfully be so used. The strong, extravagant, not to say the intemperate, tone of the Declaration of 1662 betrays a consciousness, on the part of the revisionists, that it was necessary to resort to violent asseveration, and that simple assertion would be of no avail. The stringency of the declaration shews the wisdom of our Lord's precept, "Let your yea be yea, and your nay nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." Vehement protestation belongs to one who is not fully persuaded in his own mind. A careful examination of the changes thus introduced will confirm the view of Alexander Knox (Remains, vol. i.), "The revisers seized the opportunity, contrary to what the public was reckoning on, to make our formularies, not more Puritanic, but more Catholic. They effected this, without doubt, stealthily, and, to appearance, by the minutest alteration." Without any change of features which could cause alarm, a new spirit was breathed into many parts of the offices. This point is established in detail by Mr Fisher, in his work, "Liturgical Purity our Rightful Inheritance." The excessive care which the Caroline revisionists took for the right use of the Liturgy will appear the more remarkable by the silence they maintained concerning King James's version of the Bible, which was made subsequent to the thirtynine articles agreed upon in 1603. Although the authorised version is universally adopted, yet we conceive that all men would hesitate to put their hand to a declaration expressing their unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained therein. Nor is this hesitation limited to the English translation; we would not express this unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained in the Textus Receptus, or any other edition of the New Testament. The use of the authorised version is common to the Church of England and Nonconformists, because it is felt to be more conducive to the edification of the people than any other. Churchmen and dissenters alike feel" Salus populi suprema lex." We are not aware that the clergy would subject themselves to any penalty if they thought proper to read any other English translation; we cannot make out that they would trangress any ordinance, precept, or canon of the church, if each man read his own translation, unless it be the technical offence of not reading out of the book which the churchwardens had provided for that purpose. The fact is, the Church of England has treated the clergy as honest men in this matter of reading the authorised version. The Caroline revisionists, in introducing the church of the Prayer Book, looked upon the clergy as dishonest and insincere. The confidence reposed in the clergy as regards the reading of the Scriptures has never been abused. A few cases may have occurred in which the defects of the authorised version have been unwisely and ostentatiously paraded in such a manner as to betray the affectation of superior learning; but generally the emendations suggested and hinted at from the pulpit and the press have been made from a simple and sincere desire to feed the church of God with the pure milk of the word, and to edify the body of Christ. The fact is, no legal enactment can secure fidelity. The slight and slender security which has been taken for the reading of holy Scripture has been tested by the experience of 250 years, and has been found satisfactory and sufficient; the strong and stringent security taken by the Caroline revisionists has turned out a mockery, a delusion, and a snare. It is quite competent for a clergyman, without compromise of principle or character, of credit or caste, to suggest amendments in the authorised version, or to advocate a new translation; but to hint at blemishes in the Liturgy, or to suggest the propriety of a revision, exposes him to the charge of breaking his ordination vows. The stringency of the declaration has defeated its end. All agree that it must be interpreted in some conditional sense. Each one determines for himself the limits within which he exercises the liberty of private judgment. Some interpret the subscription so as to claim the right of holding all Roman doctrine, while others deem it compatible with the cold negations of Rationalism. The retention of this oath has seriously lowered the standard of professional and personal morality. To this source we ascribe the Jesuitical language of Professor Jowett Cases often occur in which we must do as other men do, and act upon a general understanding, even though unable to reconcile a particular practice to the letter of truthfulness, or even to an individual conscience." The non-natural sense in which this non-natural declaration is necessarily interpreted has done much to introduce the doubt, suspicion, and scepticism which lurks beneath the altars of the church, and steals into the most solemn mysteries of religion. What faith is now reposed in subscription? What a reproach that the standard of honesty, sincerity, and truth should be lower in the church than in the mart? What a scandal that the worldling should have reason to charge the church with breeding a peculiar and artificial morality which has a corrupting influence on the transactions of ordinary life? Yet such is the joint effect of the Caroline Revisionists, and of the Act of Uniformity in 1662, which could only have been devised by men of seared consciences and hard hearts. Though the revision of the Liturgy was effected by convocation, 600 changes being made in one month,-though these changes were made after ascertaining the mind of the Presbyterians, and Sheldon made good his word, "Now we know their minds, we will make them all knaves if they conform,"yet the work of convocation was incomplete and ineffectual until Parliament put the finishing stroke to their labours. It was the especial disgrace of the House of Commons to perpetrate this act of national schism, cruel in its intention, disastrous in its results. In the Commons, says Clarendon, "Every man, according to his passion, thought of adding something to the measure which might make it more grievous to somebody he did not love." Politics were intruded into the sphere of religion, the ephemeral shibboleths of party were stereotyped in the symbols of faith. The political clauses of the act were expunged or modified on the accession of William III. Those who had expelled the last of the Stuarts could no longer maintain the VOL. XII.-NO. XLIII. K |