Page images
PDF
EPUB

the nations."-Lastly, dominion shall be added to bliss, and glory to victory: They were seen "clothed with white robes, and with palms in their hands. And they shall reign for ever and ever."

But I will not vainly attempt to measure what is boundless, and to fathom eternity; let me, in conclusion, turn your attention to what is more expressly of practical application. The descriptions given us in Scripture, are designed, not to inflame the imagination, but to teach and improve the heart; not to transport us in a moment of fancied elevation heyond the bounds of space and time, but to accompany us to the most ordinary scenes of duty, to control our daily thoughts and most active habits of life. They are intended habitually to turn our minds from earthly things to heavenly; to shame us out of our regard to the false and perishing idols of this world; and to fix us to what is substantial, eternal, and divine. Above all, they are intended to direct us to the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ: and to exalt our views of that Divine Being, who once came as a humble sojourner on earth, to minister to all, and to die for all; but who shall appear the second time without sin unto salvation. And great as His final triumph will be, when He shall subdue all things unto Himself; perhaps to the eye of faith that is scarcely a less triumph which is now visible upon earth, when a single soul, upheld through Divine grace in the near prospect of dissolution, and under all the weakness and languor of mortal decay, is enabled to pierce the darkness of the shadow of death; and steadfastly to look up, and by faith behold the glory that shall be revealed.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer. I AM one of those, who feel as liberally towards all real Christians, let them be of what denomination

they please, as any man breathing can possibly do; and I fully believe that I could live all my days with any pious Dissenter, who has the same temper of mind towards Churchmen, in a spirit of uninterrupted harmony. At the same time Iama truly zealous Churchman, and I do most heartily approve of what some of your correspondents have written respecting the regular performance of the Church Service. Occasional alterations in the course of our liturgical forms, however good they may be in themselves; observations inserted in reading the lessons, however appropriate and terse they may be; extempore prayers before sermon however short, neat, and spiritual; all appear to me to be exceptionable in this view, that they are breaches of regular order, and, to say the least, are very like violations of solemn subscription. Not to insist upon the prejudices which these things raise in some well disposed minds, they certainly set an example of irregurity; and if the clergy are not regular in the desk, communion rail, and pulpit, with what appearance of propriety, or at all events with what probable effect can they call their clerks, pew-openers, sextons, &c. to account for any innovations they may introduce, or omissions they may choose to make?

I am, however, entering more largely into this question than I intended. Till I read the paper signed C. C. in your Number for March, often as I have performed the Communion Service, I had never been led to suspect that any difference was intended between "alms" and " oblations." Replete as our forms are with such expressions as "praises and thanksgivings," "supplications and prayers," and various other duplicate terms, (if I may invent a phrase,) I had always considered these two words as intending one and the same thing; namely our donations at the sacramental table, which are alms to man, but oblations to God. Some, however, think differently it seems, and even

appear to have a scruple on the one hand respecting the use, and on the other respecting the omission, of the term "oblations." I conceive, sir, that no person who considers the word oblations in the sense supposed by your correspondent C. C. needs scruple for a moment in omitting it; for what the rubric says concerning both must surely apply to each by itself; "If there be no alms and oblations," (which is frequently the case in country places,)" then shall the words, of accepting our alms and oblations,' be left unsaid." From whence I infer, by parity of reason, that if either of these two things, (supposing them to be two, which, however, I do not believe,) be wanting, the term expressing that one is to be left unsaid and the other term to be used. Earnestly desiring that we all may be spiritual, without spiritual pride; and attentive to form, without formality; I R. C. H.

am,

&c.

the prayer, at the last revision, at the Restoration. The prayer as it stands in the first Prayer-book of Edward VI. mentions neither alms nor oblations. In the subsequent modification, alms alone was inserted, and so it continued until the year 1661; when the revisers gave the prayer its present form.

From this state of the case, it is, in the first place, obvious, that the addition" and oblations" can be referred to no obsolete practice. What therefore your correspondent C. C. has said, of the propriety of omitting the word oblations because ministers of the Church of England had long refrained from availing themselves of offerings at the sacrament, has no shadow of foundation. An expression adopted for the first time in 1661, can have no relation to an antiquated custom.

The circumstance which Mr. Wheatly ought more expressly to have mentioned, is that the revisers in 1661 were chiefly guided in their modifications by the Liturgy which had been sent down to Scotland, in the year 1637. Bishop Mant, in the introduction to his Comment on the Prayer-book, appears to have stated the fact exactly as it was.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer. As every question relating to the due celebration of public worship, must be in its degree interesting, I beg leave to offer a few remarks" In the Scotch Common Prayer on the word OBLATIONS, in the prayer for the whole state of Christ's church.

In your note on C. C.'s letter, in your Number for April, you present the substance of a paper in which though the writer contends that the word oblations may properly be retained, in the meaning given to it by Wheatly and Bishop Patrick, namely the elements of bread and wine offered to God, he yet expresses a doubt whether that meaning may not be unfounded. Your correspondent's doubt, I humbly conceive, could only arise from Wheatly's want of clearness in expressing what it was his purpose to state, and from his indistinct notice of a circumstance which serves particularly to throw light upon the expression in question. This expression was first introduced into

Book," he says, "there were several improvements made; some of which were taken into the last review, and more might have been so, but that the nation was not disposed to receive them, the distempers of the late times having prejudiced many against it."

The extent in which this remark applies, may be seen at once by laying the three Prayer-books together; the Prayer - book as it stood before the revision; the Scotch Prayer - book; and the Prayer-book as we now have it.

In the passage in question, it will be found, that the unrevised Prayerbook, in the rubric before the prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church, says nothing of the sacramental elements, but is wholly occupied with the "poore men's boxe," and "the due and accus

tomed offerings" to the curate. If the expression "and oblations" had then been in the prayer, your correspondent C. C's argument for omitting it would have been as forcible as it is now unfounded.

In the Scotch Prayer-book the corresponding rubric, after giving direction respecting the collecting and presenting of the alms, proceeds as follows:-" And the Presbyter shall then offer up and place the bread and wine prepared for the sacrament upon the Lord's table, that it may be ready for that service." It is to be observed, however, that in the prayer there was no change of expression, the word alms only being mentioned.

In the present English Prayerbook, the rubric respecting alms differs materially from the former corresponding rubric, and a good deal resembles that in the Scotch Prayer-book. A new rubric then follows respecting the sacramental elements, resembling in substance the corresponding Scotch rubric, but omitting the expression "offer up," and simply directing the priest to place the bread and wine upon the table.

At the first view, it might be thought unlikely that the expression" offer up" should have been omitted in the rubric, if the same idea was to be attached to the newly introduced term in the prayer. But Bishop Mant's remark respecting popular prejudice applies particularly to that very omission. William Prynne, in his book entitled "Hidden Works of Darknes sbrought to Public Light," amongst his other charges against Archbishop Laud, dwells largely on the Scotch Prayer-book, and in the course of his strictures, fixes on the expression" offer up" as symptomatic of Popery. "In which," said he, "we have an offering up of the bread and wine, by the priest at the holy table; just as the priests do in the mass, and derived from them; as Missale Ro. manum, Cæremoniale, Pontificale and Breviarium Romanum, inform CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 245.

us," p. 159. The insertion, therefore, in the rubric, of an expression which had been thus stigmatized, would have been contrary to that prudence which they were obliged to exercise; while at the same time they could not but be anxious to retain a practice which had been universally observed in the ancient church.

How far

In order, therefore, to effect this object without alarm, they appear to have transferred the "offering up" of the sacramental elements from the rubric, to the prayer. In the former, it would have arrested observation, and might have provoked resistance to their general design; which evidently was to restore to our Communion Service as much as they could of that ancient spirit which Bishop Ridley, in the first Prayer-book of Edward, had been so careful to preserve; but which, at the instance of Martin Bucer, and perhaps with a view to advance nearer to continental Protestantism, had been as carefully excluded in the second. the revisers effected their purpose, can only be seen on close and distinct comparison. They were evidently confined, by the cautious policy of government, to minute, and almost imperceptible, changes; but the united import of those changes will be found as significant, as individually they were noiseless and inoffensive. Their common character is the surest key to the meaning of a particular instance: and the offering up of the bread and wine, having been uniformly sanctioned by that standard to which the revisers wished to approximate, as well as placed before them by the model which they had immediately in view, (in default, moreover, of every other imaginable reason for their introducing such an expression,) what can we conclude, but that, by the insertion in question, they wished, not only to do quietly what in the former instance had been done with of fence, but also, to do it better; for 20

without doubt the offering up was better provided for, by a significant expression in the prayer, without any mention in the rubric, than it had been by being mentioned in the rubric, without any corresponding expression in the prayer. Perhaps some may be inclined to think, that the object was not of sufficient importance to have been provided for with such studious care. But it must be remembered, that the wish of the revisers was, to bring our Communion Service as nearly as possible to the spirit of the purest antiquity; and that they could not but know, that from the earliest times, the offering up of the bread and wine had been accounted a substantial part of the eucharistic celebration. Mr. Mede, as Wheatly intimates, had established this fact in a treatise on the subject, which he justly supposes had due weight with the revisers. But there is another evidence for the importance of the practice, which, though not likely to have influenced the revisers, is, in itself, the most powerful which could be adduced, both for elucidating their purpose, and justifying their solicitude. They could not have overlooked an ancient feature in the eucharist, which even Richard Baxter regarded as essential.

"This sacrament," says Baxter, "containeth these three parts:1. The consecration of the bread and wine, which maketh it the representative body and blood of Christ;-2. The representation and

of commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ;-3. The communion, or communication by Christ and reception by the people."

On the first particular, his words are:-" In the consecration, the church doth first offer the creatures of bread and wine to be accepted of God, to this sacred use; and God accepteth and blesseth them to this use; which he signifieth both by the words of his own institution, and by the action of his ministers, and their benediction, they being the agents of God to the people, in this accepting and blessing, as they are the agents of the people to God, in offering or dedicating the creatures to this use." He adds, that in this act, "we acknowledge that God is the Creator, and so the owner, of all the creatures; for we offer them to him, as his own*."

It is worth adding, that Baxter's second particular-namely, the of fering up of the body and blood of Christ representative, by faith and prayer, to God-had been particularly provided for, both in the first Prayer-book of Edward, and in the Scotch Prayer-book; but the prayer of oblation, as it was called in the latter, had been so confidently accused of Popery by Prynne, that the revisers (doubtless much against their will) could evidently not venture to insert it.

SCRUTATOR.

* Baxter's Practical Works, fol. Vol. I. p. 469.

MISCELLANEOUS.

For the Christian Observer. MORAL ESTIMATE OF MILTON' PARADISE LOST. (Concluded from p. 218.) HAVING enumerated, under very general heads, some, though by no means all, of the moral excellencies

of Paradise Lost, it remains that notice be taken of a few things, of which the tendency seems not to be of so desirable a nature. The writer will not be confident or positive on some points. He would rather cautiously suggest them as objectionable, than vehemently contend

against them as such. It is not to be expected in the present state of human imperfection, that any work should be produced without bearing that indelible stamp. A good writer suggests, as an argument in favour of the divine authority of the Bible, that while no principles contained in that book are in the experience of mankind ever found to be incorrect, no other book probably was ever written, even under the guidance of the Bible, which did not teach or embody some principles that may be found to be erroneous. In poetry, where imagination, the most lawless power of the mind, is expected to predominate, we should not naturally look for a peculiar exemption from human infirmity. Compared with other forms of writing, it would be apt to have its full share of an earthly spirit. Still, if it is not the privilege of the Christian poet to be perfect, it is his duty to be consistent; and he should aim at an indefectible standard, however short of it he may come. The nearest possible approximation to evangelical requirements should be the object kept in view. In accordance with these remarks, I would first suggest whether Milton's frequent allusions to the fables and mythology of heathen antiquity be not a derogation from the value of his poem, as true religion is concerned. I do not know that an occasional illustration of his subject from this source, in the way of similitude, would be inconsistent with Christian propriety. But, in Paradise Lost, there is such a profusion of these illustrations as to throw over the work too much an air of heathenism; and it will occur to the reader that they are not all made in the form of similitude. An unnatural and unbecoming mixture of truth and fable is the consequence; the aspect of which, to a religious mind, is by no means pleasant, and the effect of which, on any mind, is not entirely harmless. The beauty and elegance with which

these illustrations are made, n doubt conceal somewhat of the deformity of the materials of which they are constituted; but that is a circumstance which only increases their danger. Is it not preferable that the fictions of mythology should be suffered, for the most part, to remain in those repositories of classic fame, where they will interest the mind in their proper connexion -a connexion in which they will be less likely to mislead and corrupt it? In this case, there would be at least but an inconsiderable temptation on the part of the reader to confound these "phantasms and monsters" with the real productions of nature, or the accounts which are handed down concerning them, with the portions of accredited history. Error is never so dangerous as when found in company with truth; and as the fables of heathenism form a family by themselves, so let them not be suffered to mingle profanely in the lovely circle of Christian verities. The poet needed not to recur to error for ornament, when nature and truth at his bidding would have lent him their world of enchantments. The pure mind of Cowper seldom admitted such an amalgamation, and his productions want not any charm that genius or taste can impart to them.

An apology, I know, is offered for Milton, on the ground that what he borrows from the heathen mythology he applies in the shape of similitude; and moreover, as an editor observes, Milton resembled Bezaleel, who was to make the furniture of the tabernacle. Like him he was endowed with extraordinary talents and like him, he employed Egyptian gold to embellish his work. But as was above mentioned, the poet's illustrations from the source in question are not always made in the manner alleged,—a circumstance which every reader will recollect. Besides, whatever might be conceded in regard to a very sparing use, in a cautious form, of mythological fiction, it would not

« PreviousContinue »