EPISCOPAL ORDERS. We have thought it right to give the following fresh correspondence on the above subject, between Mr. Mayow, the Vicar of Market-Lavington, and the Archbishop of Canterbury. With these letters, we do trust that the Archbishop will cease to be molested by those whose only care it seems to be, to imitate those of old who cried, "The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, are we." We cannot dwell with the slightest satisfaction on the noisy efforts of those still within our own communion to trumpet forth the exclusive validity of their own "orders," at the expence of reducing to the rank of what they are pleased to term "laymen," those by whose ministry the Holy Spirit has been pleased to create anew many a soul, and to build up many "a congregation of faithful men by the ministration of the word, and the sacraments or ordinances of Christ. When the Chief Shepherd and Bishop of souls shall come, we fear that far too many of these pretenders to an exclusive ministry in His Church, on the sole ground of Episcopal ordination, will be forced to hide their heads before a multitude of those whose calling to the ministry they despise, yea, and before many who, perhaps without any outward call whatever, have felt constrained by the love of Christ and of immortal souls to make known the Gospel they have themselves embraced. Mr. Mayow's concluding letter demurs to the Archbishop's opinion, as to the position of foreign pastors; he quietly assumes that in "the home question" his Grace does ignore the ministerial character of the persons who preside over the various Dissenting bodies of orthodox Christians. We feel confident that, were the question directly put, as to the invalidity, that is the worthlessness of their office, that his Grace would not long hesitate in answering, that his Master had sheep and shepherds which, although they were not all in one earthly fold, yet were all shielded by Him and fed from one pasture, and shall all meet at last in one heavenly fold, where every feeble hurdle of earthly separation shall have been swept away. 66 (1.) "Market Lavington, Devizes, My Lord Archbishop,-In a matter of so much public interest as that involved in your Grace's letter to Mr. Gawthorn, and subsequently further enlarged upon in the correspondence between your Grace and the Rev. W. Palmer, I trust that you will not think that I exceed the bounds of propriety, as a priest in the province of Canterbury, if Ì venture to ask a further explanation on one point. "Your Grace informed Mr. Gawthorn that you hardly imagined that there were 'two bishops on the bench, or one clergyman in fifty throughout our Church, who would deny the validity of the orders of these pastors solely on account of their wanting the imposition of Episcopal hands.' And your Grace has since, in your letter to Mr. Palmer, stated, that you thought Mr. Gawthorn's inquiry equivalent to the question whether we hold that no person in any country, or any circumstances, will be entitled to minister to the Church of Christ, except through the imposition of Episcopal hands. I replied' (your Grace's letter proceeds) that I imagined this to be as far as possible from the general opinion either among our bishops or clergy. I knew that neither our Articles nor our Formularies justified such an opinion. I knew that many of our ancient divines had disclaimed such an opinion.' your Grace a few sentences further on concludes with a reference to Hooker's judgment, that the lineal descent of power by apostolical succession is not in certain cases to be urged, absolutely and without any possible exception.' And "May I then respectfully ask from your Grace some further explanation upon one point, viz., in what countries or under what circumstances such ordinations as have not the imposition of Episcopal hands conveying the gift of the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a priest in the Church of God are supposed to be valid ? This point, your Grace will observe, is not reached either in your Grace's letter to Mr. Gawthorn or in that to Mr. Palmer; and yet it is most important; because if no limitation be set on this matter, there is danger of the greatest licence being used in the interpretation of your Grace's language. Hooker, in the very place above referred to (Book 7, ch. xiv. sec. 11), states very precisely and exactly the two cases in which he conceives exceptions may lawfully be made. 1. When God himself doth raise up any...... ratifying their calling by manifest signs and tokens himself from heaven. 2. When the exigence of necessity doth constrain to leave the usual ways of the Church...... where the Church must needs have some ordained, and neither hath nor can have possibly a bishop to ordain.' And he sums up his argument in that place with the words immediately following those referred to by your Grace. "Those cases of inevitable necessity excepted, none may ordain but only bishops. By the imposition of their hands it is that the Church giveth power of order both unto presbyters and deacons.' "I wish, therefore, especially to ask whether we may understand your Grace's language to mean the same thing as Hooker's, that, although under some circumstances the imposition of Episcopal hands may be dispensed with, yet this is only in cases of absolute, inevitable necessity, where there has been and is the most earnest longing, and desire, and value for Episcopal ordination, but where it has been unattainable. I believe I am not mistaken if I say that this is the ground constantly taken and the limitation universally insisted upon by such of our ancient and great divines as have treated of this subject, and that the judgment of Andrewes and Bramhall is as carefully guarded as that of Hooker. It is evidently a matter of very serious interest to know whether such a restriction to cases of absolute and inevitable necessity is to be understood as the sense of your Grace's correspondence. "I will not dissemble that in any case I am myself constrained to think that even those great divines whom I have named have, in an excess of charity, and in very difficult times, made an uncatholic allowance to the position and circumstances of foreign communions; but, at any rate, the concession thus made and limited is very different from what may be supposed (without limitation distinctly expressed) to be intended in your Grace's letters; and I am sure, if your Grace shall be able to state that you have intended an adherence to the principle above laid down by Hooker, and that circumstances of inevitable necessity' (to use again his expression), where Episco. pacy, though highly valued and desired, cannot be obtained, can alone supply the lack of imposition of Episcopal hands, the plain declaration that such is your Grace's conviction would be a great satisfaction and consolation to many perplexed minds and anxious hearts. "I am certain your Grace will allow that a deep anxiety in these matters is unavoidable at the present time, and I trust I shall therefore not appear to have troubled your Grace unnecessarily. "I have the honour to be, "M. W. MAYOW. "Perhaps it is right, though I think hardly necessary, that I should add that I do not consider this to be a private communication." (2.) "Addington, Oct. 6. "Rev. Sir,-Having cleared my letter to Mr. Gawthorn from the misapprehension which had been fastened upon it, I must beg to be excused from entering into further discussion on the subject to which it relates. "The question which you propose to me, as to the countries or to the circumstances in which Episcopal ordination may be dispensed with, would require a dissertation for which I have neither leisure nor inclination. I am satisfied with knowing that the validity of our own orders is indisputable. "I used the words of Hooker, not for his authority, but because they expressed my own opinion, which is in exact accordance with documents, which are common to us both, and to all the clergy, in the Nineteenth and Twenty-third Articles of our Church, and the rubric prefixed to the Ordination Service. "I regret that, in consequence of my absence from home, this reply to your letter of the 1st instant has been delayed; "And remain, Reverend Sir, "Your faithful servant, "J. B. CANTUAR. "Rev. M. W. Mayow." (3.) "Market Lavington, Devizes, "My Lord Archbishop,-I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your Grace's letter of the 6th instant, which, however, having been missent' by the Post-office, did not reach me until the 9th. "May I venture to assure your Grace that I had no wish by my letter of the 1st to impose upon your Grace the necessity of a 'dissertation' as to what were the countries in which Episcopacy might be dispensed with. It is true I used the terms, in what countries and under what circumstances may such ordinations as have not the imposition of Episcopal "I may, perhaps, be permitted to add, that I quoted Hooker, not altogether as an authority, but because his words, in the passage referred to, very forcibly and conveniently expressed the limitation to which I was anxious to call your Grace's attention, as well as because your Grace appeared evidently to point to him when (besides directly referring to him) you said, 'I knew that many of our ancient divines had disclaimed such an opinion,' viz., as the absolute necessity of Episcopal ordination. It seemed, therefore, not unnatural to ask, whether, with Hooker's concession, your Grace intended also to adopt his reservation and restriction? "If your Grace should have patience with me to read the above remarks, I would still hope it is not impossible you may reply to the question I have asked, understanding it to be narrowed to the single point whether your Grace conceives our XIX. and XXIII. Articles, with the preface to the Ordinal, to warrant a larger concession than that comprised in the words of Hooker before cited,These cases of inevitable necessity excepted, none may ordain but bishops only?' "Whether your Grace may see fit to make any further reply to me or not, I beg to express my sincere thanks for the kindness and courtesy of the letter now received. "I have the honour to be, 66 'My Lord Archbishop, "Your Grace's very obedient humble servant, "MAYOW WYNELL MAYOW. of our orders, and conceive themselves at tion, you will perceive that no heretical or schismatical use' of my language can be justly made, and to prevent unreasonable inferences is impossible. My original letter distinctly referred to the foreign Protestant ministers, concerning whom a question had been asked me, and to them alone. It went no farther than to declare my opinion (which I sup. posed to be a general opinion), that persons placed in their circumstances were not to be considered as mere laymen,' having no valid ministry, solely for the want of Episcopal ordination. "Such being the case, I must still crave your excuse; I decline to pronounce dogmatically upon the general subject, which is very extensive and very complicated, and not, as far as I can see, so clearly settled by Scripture as to warrant a more definite opinion than that laid down in the Twenty-third of our Articles, or the rubric prefixed to the Ordination Service. "I remain, Reverend Sir, "Your faithful servant, "Rev. M. W. Mayow." (5.) "Market Lavington, Devizes,. My Lord Archbishop,-I beg to acknowledge and to thank your Grace for your letter of the 13th, received this morning. "The question concerning orders without imposition of Episcopal hands having been mooted as it has been, I certainly could have wished, even if the subject be not in your Grace's estimation, 'so clearly settled by Scripture as to warrant a more definite opinion than that laid down in the Twenty-third of our Articles, or the preface to the Ordination Service;' that the Church might have been permitted to know how far your Grace deems those documents themselves to be definite, and to what extent the subject is therein 'settled.' nion in these realms can lay any claim to your Grace's sanction for the validity of any orders which they may profess to have in their respective schisms, or henceforward quote your Grace's words, as proving that those who minister in their congregations are not merely laymen,' such cases having been, if I do not misread your Grace's last communication, beside the purport of your observations, This point, from Mr. Gawthorn's allusion to Dr. Cumming, and from your Grace, in reply to him, having used the expression the validity of the orders of these ministers' (not those foreign ministers), was not, I think, before so plain as it is now rendered. "It would be an insincerity on my part, which I am sure your Grace would be the last person to wish that I should practise, were I to imply that the matter of the foreign pastors appears to me to be disposed of, either according to the sense of our own Formularies or the judgment of the Church Catholic. I feel bound, therefore, most respectfully, but yet most solemnly, to enter my protest against being supposed to be one of that majority imagined by your Grace to coincide in the view of the foreign pastors laid down in your Grace's recently published correspondence. But although I say this, I will hope that the home question (if I may use the phrase) assumes a somewhat better aspect, as we now know that your Grace has not intended to deal with that part of the subject at all, and therefore cannot have warranted any inference as to ordinations (so called) without imposition of Episcopal hands being valid anywhere in Great Britain or Ireland. "This particular point, even if it stood alone, would make me glad that I have addressed your Grace; and perceiving of how much general interest and importance I feel the whole subject to be, your Grace will not be surprised if I consider it desirable to make public this correspondence. "If I have in any way unnecessarily trespassed upon your Grace's attention or time, or if I have used any single word or expression which I ought not to have used, I beg most sincerely to crave your Grace's pardon, and again thanking your Grace for your kindness, "I have the honour to be, "M. W. MAYOW. "To his Grace the Abp. of Canterbury." LONDON: J. H. JACKSON, ISLINGTON GREEN. THE CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN, AND CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE. NOVEMBER, 1851. ENDOWMENT OF MAYNOOTH. THE coming Session of Parliament must not be an idle one for Protestant legislators or Protestant electors. No doubt whatever can now exist upon two points connected with Popery;-first, that its mask is off, and that it is determined to wage war openly and secretly for the extinction of Protestantism; secondly, that it is using every effort to propagate its doctrines throughout every parish in the kingdom,-doctrines which lead to idolatry, ignorance, rebellion, and discord. Upon the first point Protestants have been lately roused by the open division of a Protestant kingdom into a Romish archbishopric and twelve bishoprics, created by the Bull of a foreign sovereign; the insult has been met in some feeble sort by a half-hearted and apathetic legislature, while it was resented and disclaimed with a far higher and nobler feeling by a Protestant nation, that felt for the honour of God and the true faith of His Church, as well as for the dignity of its Queen. It is far from enough that this has been done. We have shewn Rome, it is true, that England can still indignantly protest against its movements, when it atNOVEMBER-1851. tempts to assert a territorial dominion; but Rome will hardly stop to consider the temporary check as of any 'mportance, while England bestows its Maynooth grant, pays its staff of bishops and priests in our colonies, and thus nationally sanctions à system against which we nationally protest. Thirty years of measures of concession, and of false liberality, have to be retraced. The work of retrogression is hard, but the experience we have bought from the effects of those measures is amply sufficient to quicken the exertions of those whose eyes are open to behold the fulfilment of all that was predicted as the consequence of believing, trusting, and granting concessions and aidto Rome. First and foremost in the list of acts to be blotted out from our statute book, must be that legislative authority which gives our money, and the recognition of the State, to Maynooth College. We must no longer pay either for poison, or maintain and educate those who are trained to spread the poison wherever Rome sends them as its missionaries. It is with no feeling of hatred to the mil 2 H |