Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

REVISION OF THE LITURGY.

In reviewing the comparative failure of the Savoy Conference, Bishop Short makes the following remarks, which may now perhaps act as a timely caution to others: "When men, entertaining opinions at total variance with each other, meet for the purpose of discussing them, unless they are possessed of extraordinary forbearance, the distance between them is likely to be increased, rather than diminished. The only method, under such circumstances, from which any favourable result could rationally be expected, would be, if the more moderate persons belonging to the ruling party were selected, who had by private communication gained an insight into the points in which alteration was chiefly demanded, and were directed by their commission, and themselves disposed, to concede everything which might be given up with safety to the constitution of the Church. Such concessions might then become acts of grace, while angry irritation would be avoided: and if unanimity could hardly be hoped for even from this means, yet the proceeding would appear likely to unite the more moderate members of both parties, (the only persons whose good opinion is really worth cultivating,) and leave the whole blame of the failure on those, who, after all, were determined to continue divisions," (History, s. 701, p. 504).*

To sum up, then; it would seem necessary for those who wish for Li

*Rev. C. Simeon considers that it was "the unreasonable scrupulosity of some, and the unbending pertinacity of others" which "defeated the object of that assembly" in 1661. (Hor. Hom. ii. p. 211). The "dilemna" in which the Bishops placed Baxter and his friends as to asking for either too much, or too little, is pointed out by Bp. Short, in his History, s. 659, pp. 481-2. See also s. 668. p. 490. It may here be just remarked that this candid and learned Prelate shows us in s. 595, p. 435, note, how our Episcopacy could, even under existing laws, be practically regulated according to Abp. Ussher's "Reduction of Episcopacy" (which was reprinted in the "Christian Guardian" for Dec. 1850, p. 557.) Bp. Short in s. 585, offers some further remarks upon it. Bp. Short's view of Episcopacy, in s. 460 and s, 804, is very clear and satisfactory.

NOVEMBER-1851.

*

497

turgical revision, to avail themselves of the public press for free and open discussion of the subject. They must then endeavour (laying aside private caprice and individual tastes) to come to some sort of general agreement among themselves as to the nature and extent of the desired changes which should be as few as possible, (leaving matters of mere taste to the Commission), advocated in a temperate and moderate tone, and supported by sound arguments. Taking warning from the lesson afforded by the Savoy Conference, they must neither demand nor expect too much, lest they fail of gaining anything at all; and they must be content if they succeed in gaining something. Having succeeded in something like an agreement, the next step would be petitions to the Sovereign, or one united petition, presented by delegates chosen from among those most competent to support the cause. A Royal Commission, composed of representatives of both parties might then be granted, (as in 1661), whose emendations might be ratified-if not by both Convocation and Parliament, † yet-at least by Parliament.

* See the Dean of Bristol's letter of 23rd Aug. 1851, to J. N. Bennett, Esq., of Plymouth. Also a seasonable tract by Mr. Bennett, entitled "Progressive Reformation a Church Principle,' being an "occasional paper" of the "Plymouth Church Reform Association." (Hall, Virtue, & Co., London, 1851). Even the Bishop of Exeter, in defending Rev. W. Maskell, maintained that as he "declares, that he accepts, and is bound by, the Church's present doctrine, I could not hold him open to censure for saying, that this doctrine might be improved, whether by reverting to opinions or practices formerly held, or by introducing something altogether new," &c. (Letter of 10th Nov., 1848, to Rev. J. Hatchard. &c.) As his Lordship is so warm a defender of apostolical succession, it is to be hoped that in deal. ing with such proposals from the party opposed to his own, he will remember an apostolic charge to a primitive Bishop, "doing nothing by partiality," (1 Tim. iv. 21!)

The whole question of the Proper Authority for Liturgical Revision is so fully and ably discussed in "Scriptural Revision of the Liturgy" in a "letter to Lord J. Russell" by "a

2 I

It only remains to add a word of caution to some whose indiscreet zeal in (i.) attacking "the Rubric as if it were the principal cause of the present "agitation," and (ii.) in advocating sweeping changes-such as the permission of extempore prayer, (see the Christian Guardian, Dec. 1850, p. 566,)* would, if not restrained, only cause divisions among the advocates of Reform, and thus weaken their power, as well as irritate the adverse party. For (i.) with respect to "the Rubric," the most rigid observance of it in its true spirit, and with Protestant feelings, would not countenance the

Member of the Middle Temple," (Groombridge, London, 1851), -especially at pp. 159-168, and pp. 179-184,-and in a learned and able "Lecture" delivered at Plymouth, on "Revision of the Liturgy," by J. N. Bennett, Esq., (Hall, Virtue, & Co., London, 1851), at pp. 36-44; that it is needless here to enter upon that question. Of the five Liturgies of the English Church, compiled in 1549, 1552, 1559, 1604, and 1661-2, in two only (viz., those of 1549 and 1661-2) were the proposed changes referred to Convocation for their approval. (See Wheatly on the Common Prayer, Introduction, pp. 22-30, Bp. Mant's Prayer-Book, Introduction, pp. i.vi.) Mr. Bennett, at p. 41, considers that Convocation was not consulted in 1549. But he is mistaken. (See Wheatly, p. 24, and Lathbury's History of Convocation, c. vi. pp. 142-3). Collier's Ecclesiastical History is given a copy of the Commission in 1661, from which it appears that both parties were entrusted with the work of Revision-Bishops and Puritans.

In

The writer thinks this remark will also apply to the proposition of "N. N." in the September number, p. 423, col. 2, so far as relates to "the introduction of a few more (words) of warning" into our Burial Service. Surely, the precatory sentences contain enough? e. g. "Deliver us not into the bitter pains of eternal death"-an emphasis on the "us" would give warning enough as to our opinion of the state of a departed sinner. Let us be content if we can only succeed in obtaining "the omission" or alteration" of a few words of uncertain application" in this Office. It is a singular fact, that while in 1661, the "High Church" party defended the indiscriminate use of our Burial Service against the Puritans, in 1851, a petition has been presented to the Bishops, signed by "nearly 4,000" clergymen, chiefly of the "High Church" school, against its indiscriminate

use!

*

vagaries of Puseyism. In only two or three points can the Rubric be made, by means of forced and strained interpretations, to countenance Romanizing practices. And they who candidly examine the Rubrics will generally find some good reason for their directions, which is unobserved in a careless perusal; indeed it frequently happens that " good and sufficient reasons may be given for particular directions, which may perhaps appear in the eye of the superficial observer to have been arbitrary enactments," (Bp. Mant). And (ii.) with reference to extempore prayer, the infinite superiority of Liturgical forms in public worship has been so clearly established by Dr. M'Neile in his "Lectures on the Church of England," No. iii, pp. 128

139, (Hatchards) that it is to be hoped that none of the friends of Revision will injure the cause by demanding liberty for themselves to indulge in extempore petitions in the public service of the sanctuary, which, let them in all candour remember, are to the congregation no less a "Form" of prayer than the petitions in the Liturgy, and in beauty and grandeur far inferior.†

*The Act of Uniformity enjoins “that no... rites or ceremonies shall be openly used in any Church, Chapel, or other Publick Place, &c.... other than what is prescribed, and appointed to be used in and by the" Prayer "Book." Surely then, it is possible to prevent the addition of Romish ceremonies in the performance of Divine service? Rev. T. Lathbury, in his History of Convocation, argues that even turning to the East during the repetition of the Creed, is forbidden by this clause of the Act, (c. xv. p. 395). This custom was first introduced into the Reformed Church by Abp. Laud. (See Osburn's Hidden Works of Darkness, c. vi, p. 172).

The Rev. A. Boyd truly has remarked, "Often has the objection been urged against the Church's members, that they are tied to forms: often has the boast been uttered, that men of other denominations worship in the liberty of thoughts which rush unprompted from the mind. In such a contrast as this, there is a mistake, and that a gross one. It is true that members of the Church of England approach God through a form of prayer; but it is not true that they who dissent from us dispense with a form of prayer. The simple truth

THE NESTORIAN PATRIARCH AND THE POPE.

With these remarks the writer will conclude. On a future occasion he may perhaps, propose some grounds

is this, that every congregation worships and must worship, through a form. We use what the Prayer-book suggests: they use what their minister suggests. That which they receive and adopt from his lips is as much a form to them as that which we receive from the Liturgy is to us. We pray not in our own words, nor do they. We follow not our own thoughts, but the thoughts of others; and so do they. We confess, and supplicate, and intercede, and thank, as the liturgic form leads; and they confess, and supplicate, and intercede, and thank, as the ministerial form leads. If each individual in a dissenting congregation uttered his own prayer-the creation of his own mind, his own arrangement, his own words-by himself alone, then might he boast of not being indebted to forms. But would this be united public worship? But, if each individual in that congregation prays after his minister, perceive ye not that they are all using the same form, prepared, composed, by another? The only real difference is this, that a minister composes his form on the spot; and the reformers, the best and holiest of their day, composed ours slowly, cautiously, deliberately. Which form

499

of common agreement to the friends of moderate Revision.*

Nailsworth, 4th Oct., 1851.

is most likely to be best, that which took months to compile, or that which takes a few minutes ? Which is most likely to ensure edification, that whose novelty distracts, whose vehemence bewilders, whose repetitions perhaps weary, whose meagreness perhaps disgusts, or that with whose every clause we are familiar, which is too copious to be unsatisfying, too perspicuous to be obscure, too simple to be misapprehended, and too majestic to be despised?" (Boyd's Lecture on the Prayer-Book).

In "a Letter to the Hon. & Rev. B. W. Noel, &c., Introductory to an Appeal to the Wisdom and Justice of our Ancestors, &c." by "a Graduate of the University of Oxford," (Hamilton & Co., 1849), at pp. 18-30, are the opinions of many of our Archbishops and Bishops since the Reformation, on the subject of Church Reform. It is sometimes said, that it is impossible to please all and therefore it is useless to attempt any revision. But are all pleased now? Would moderate and scriptural revision increase or diminish dissatisfaction? Of course the Prayer-book would at best be still a human, and therefore imperfect, composition.

COMMENT UPON THE NESTORIAN PATRIARCH AND THE POPE. (Hora Sabbataria.)

AMONG the sections of the Catholic or Universal Church of Christ, there can hardly be found one more interesting than that which is known under the name of the Nestorian; and which may trace back its origin to a period earlier than its denomination. It is supposed to have existed before Nestorius and his excommunication in the fifth century, which happened after the third General Council of Ephesus in the year of our Redemption, 431. He at least gave his name to the body of Christians, existing in Koordistan and Oroomiah, in the western part of Persia; and recently they have been found there by the enter prising traveller, Layard, whose excavations and discoveries in Armenia, will be a lasting monument to his name, whilst they enrich our museums, and illustrate history, sacred and profane. They probably received the

Gospel from the incredulous apostle, who afterwards in faith exclaimed, "My Lord, and my God!" and formed themselves into a society of many churches, under one patriarch as their head. They have been liable to the aggression of Romish Jesuits, but hitherto have lived unchanged in a tract of country dividing the Turkish and Persian dominions, preserved and taught in the antient faith of Christ, and governed by bishops and priests, or presbyters.

"A few years ago, a Jesuit offered to the Nestorian Patriarch 10,000 dollars, on condition that he would acknowledge allegiance to the Pope, to whom the Patriarch replied, in the emphatic language of Peter to Simon Magus, 'THY MONEY PERISH WITH THEE. And of late, emissaries from Rome have tendered to him the assurance, that if he will so far become

[ocr errors]

a Catholic as to recognize the supremacy of their master, he shall not only continue to be Patriarch of the Nestorians, but all the Christians of the east shall be added to his jurisdiction. To this the Patriarch replied Get thee hence, Satan.' The newest measure that has been reported to us, is a recent order, fresh from the Pope, to the Catholics of these regions, to CANONIZE NESTORIUS, whose memory every Papist has been required for so many centuries to curse, and to anathematize the Lutherans, i. e. the Protestant missionaries, with whom they propose also to class such of the Nestorians as shall not go over to the ranks of the Papists. The Nestorians fully understand that this surprising change is intended only to decoy them; and they very naturally spurn the honour thus proffered."

Upon these facts, from the pen of an American Missionary, recorded in the "American Biblical Repository" for January, 1851, it may be useful to make briefly two or three remarks.

First. We are grieved to see the Bishop of Rome, under the title of Pope, asserting his claim to be regarded Universal and Sovereign Pontiff; and in imitation of Satan pretending to give territorial jurisdiction, of his own right. Leading us to ask, Whence such power? and how was it acquired? Every instance may serve to expose such arrogance, and impress the nations of the world with a due notion of the height to which ambition may rise, whilst the garb of humility is assumed, and the name of Servant of servants, in a spirit of pride. "Such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel, for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works." It only becomes us to be the more aware of the power, in proportion to its capabilities of transformation and deceit, remembering that the day shall declare it, which will divulge the secrets of all hearts, and of every conclave.

Matt. iv. 8, 10. + 2 Cor. xi. 13, 15,

Secondly. We see how little scrupulous even infallibility is to patronize a reputed heretic, in order to accomplish purposes of ambition, and extend its dominion. The man whom ages before it had exiled, and caused to flee into a far distant region, it now enrols among the blessed number of saints and confessors, whom it honours and prays for. And to “decoy” the simple, it seeks to make friends with the followers of him who denied the title of Theotokos to the Virgin Mary, at the expence of its own consistency, and a recission, in his favour, of an ancient decree. The obedience of St. Peter's successor to his Master's admonition, "Be wise as serpents," is remarkable, and throws some light on another of His incomparable sayings, which tells us how much "wiser in their generation are the children of this world than the children of light." It was perceived that, by only such means, the ends of the Pontificate could be gained, and hence "his Holiness not merely proposed to confirm the Patriarchate to Nestorius, but canonized him, who before was rather execrated than blessed; that the antient Church bearing his name might be won over to an admiration of the Romish dispenser of grace, and fountain of everlasting honour.

But, thirdly, it is worthy of remark how stedfast and immoveable" were the disciples and imitators of Luther, anathematized as Protestants, who, on the other hand, like the Supreme "Head over all things to the Church," spurn the proffered honour. "All this power will I give thee," said the arch-tempter, "for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. If thou therefore wilt worship me, (or fall down before me) all shall be thine." But the true and faithful steward of the trust committed unto him, disdained to acknowledge the usurped authority of Anti-Christ, and having his eyes opened, to see through the design of "the man of sin, and son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped,"t held fast the profession of his faith without wavering.

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

BEING WITH JESUS.

In this instance of tergiversation and fidelity, we perceive certain characters of the Papacy and the Protestant, and how they manifest themselves, in the efforts made to extend dominion, and preserve incorruptibility of worship and doctrine. The transaction illustrates the spirit of Popery and aggression, and bids us on no consideration to forfeit the birthrights of conscience, and freedom of Protestantism. It struck the writer forcibly in reading, and led him. as it may do others who reflect, to mark the comparative defection of Churches; the contrast, under all phases, of Popery and Protestantism; and the shades of error, in connexion with

501

spiritual worship, in even advantageous opposition to the idolatrous claims of Rome. Thus the Nestorians demand our sympathies, and prayers for their restoration, and complete establishment in all necessary doctrines; whilst, like Thomas, who probably first preached the Gospel in those eastern regions, in obedience to the risen Saviour's command, to "teach all nations," they love Him whom they have never seen, and neither on Mount Gerizim, nor at Jerusalem, worship the God of their fathers as "a Spirit, in spirit and in truth." H. W. G. R.

Derby, Nov. 1st, 1851,

BEING WITH JESUS.

BY AN AMERICAN CLERGYMAN.

Ir is a household proverb, that a man is known by the company he keeps. When we observe that his companionship is with men of loose principles and bad habits, we infer that he is one of them, as well as with them. So, on the other hand, if we see him associating with the wise and good, we take him to be a man of good principles and good character, without any particular acquaintance or inquiry. And we are not mistaken. In like manner, when we are struck, as we often are, with something in a man's conversation, general deportment, and modes of thinking, like what we have noticed in a person of superior intellectual and moral worth, we reason in the same way. We regard the former as the disciple, and the latter as the master. We feel quite sure, that so striking a resemblance cannot be accidental; that the disciple has been much with the master, and that his mind and heart have been moulded by sitting so long at the feet of him whom he loves and admires.

We have a striking example of this inferential reasoning, in the fourth chapter of Acts. The priests and Sadducees had seized two of the disciples and shut them up in prison, for preaching to the people. Being brought out the next day for exami

nation, before the high priest and rulers, instead of making any apology, they fearlessly addressed the court and the multitude, in language which excited their rage and astonishment. Such a sermon as Peter gave them, they probably had never heard before, and never expected to hear. He told them, among other things, that there was no other name given under heaven among men, but the name of Jesus Christ whom they had just crucified, whereby they must be saved. "And now, when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled, and took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus." There was no other way of accounting for the readiness, propriety of diction, force of reasoning, and fearless energy with which they spoke. It needed no testimony to convince their enemies that they had been the disciples of Jesus, and were indebted to Him for what was manifestly so much above their condition and educational advantages. The conviction did not, indeed, have its proper effect upon their minds. It did not abate their inveterate hostility to the new religion and its preachers. It did not remove one of their prejudices. But it showed them how

« VorigeDoorgaan »