« PreviousContinue »
of those statements in which the Ox- his prelates to question its legality, ford addressers tell Her Majesty how (as distinctly pointed out in a page much authority her popish predeces- of the cotemporary historian Eadmer,)
were fain to leave in the hands and the less portion of that authority of their clergy; for it is but pure claimed by Henry II., would give folly to assume, as they have done, just the information which these Oxthat the limit of such restraints as ford addressers seem to want. For those sovereigns could venture to put example, whereas Eadmer says of upon the incessant aggressions of an William, “ Primatem regni sui, si usurping priesthood, must be re coacto generali episcoporum concilio garded as the limit of what a Protes. præsideret non sinebat quicquam statant Church may properly concede tuere aut prohibere nisi quæ suæ volunto a Protestant Government. But tati accommoda, et a se primo essent statement the fourth begins with such ordinata ;” this rule has no parallel an untruth that it ought not to pass in the constitutions of Clarendon. unnoticed. The whole of that state- And again, whereas William would ment is as follows :—"The largest not suffer that a bishop “implacitaret, claim ever made by any king of Eng- aut excommunicaret, aut ulla rigoris land was in the constitution of Cla- pæna constringeret, aliquem de barorendon, in the reign of your Majesty's nibus suis seu ministris,” even when predecessor, King Henry II., wherein charged with the vilest offences, “nisi it was provided, that if the Arch- ejus præcepto,” the constitutions say, bishop failed to shew justice, recourse usi ab archidiacono, vel episcopo, was at last to be had to the king, that super aliquo delicto citatus fuerit, by his precept the controversy might unde debeat eis respondere, et ad be terminated in the archbishop's citationes eorum voluerit satisfacere, court."
bene licet eis sub interdicto ponere Is it too much to ask that the eum;" and they only forbid his being Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical excommunicated“ priusquam capitalis History, who has allowed his name minister regis villæ illius conveniatur, to go forth with this Oxford docu- ut justiciet eum ad satisfactionem ment, would give his class an early venire,” Matt. Paris, p. 84, ed. 1686. opportunity of hearing him lecture
I will pass on however to stateon the constitutions of Clarendon; on ment eighth, where the addressers Becket's hypocrisy and sanctioned tell their sovereign that "it was adperjury respecting them; and on mitted (by 25 Hen. VIII. c.14,) that Henry the Second's abstinence from heresies should be finally judged in claiming, in these constitutions, what the bishops' court; and in 1530, King his predecessor William I. had not Henry VIII, himself stated in a proonly claimed authority to enforce, clamation, that cognizance of heresies, but had unshrinkingly enforced? The errors, and lollardies, appertaineth professor might observe to them, from to the judge of the holy Church, and the text of Matt. Paris, that the con not to the judge secular.” stitutions of Clarendon are there de In this statement there seem to be clared to be but recognitio sive recor both suggestio falsi, and suppressio datio cujusdam partis consuetudinum veri; for the addressers have omitted et libertatum antecessorum suorum, re to state, what Blackstone has told, gis videlicet Henrici avi sui et aliorum ; that by the statute, 2 Hen. V. c. 7, as if by thus dropping William's Lollardy was made indictable in name, the king's counsellors intended the king's courts ; which though they to give the prelates a tacit hint of the did not thereby gain an exclusive, extent to which he might have shorn yet obtained a concurrent jurisdiction their power, had he demanded a re with the bishop's consistory.” Comcognition of the whole, and not of a ment. vol. iy. p. 47. They have said part only, of what the first Norman nothing about the requisition in the sovereign had claimed.
act they cite, respecting “an indictrison between the authority which ment of heresy being first previously William exercised, without suffering found in the king's courts of com
mon law;" nor of the establishment But let us come to statement the of “a mixed jurisdiction of clergy twelfth. It tells Her Majesty, “ That and laity, for the trial and conviction during the whole reigns of King of heretics,” by a later statute of the Henry VIII., Edward VI., and Queen same king, Id. ibid. ; nor of the far- Elizabeth, there is no trace of any of ther transfer of power to laymen, in the nobility or common law judges in cases of accusation of heresy, effected ANY Commission, nor afterwards in one by an Act which Cranmer carried commission out of forty, until the overthrough parliament in 1544, viz., throw of the royal authority in the 35 Hen. VIII. c. 5.
ERRATA.-P. 25, col. 2, 1. 13, for sorinianum, read scriniarium; and for oreat, read creat. P. 26, co!, 1, 1. 26 from bot. for order, read codex ; and in the next line, and line 20, for dizisions, read decisions. In col. 2, for sciuti, read sicuti ; and line 7 from bot. for probatus, read probata.
ON THE LORD'S SUPPER:
BISHOP OF LONDON.
It must be admitted, that the ten- divines of our Church ; introducing dency of the mind of fallen man has his quotations by this remark,—"This ever been to exalt the ordinances of teaching I learnt in our own divines, religion above their proper position. and in the Fathers, long before I read In the early Church the sacraments a Roman Catholic writer.” Now, soon began to acquire a reverence when we consider the terins in which which is due only to the Lord of the this sacrament is spoken of even by sacraments; and this undue regard the Protestant divines whom Dr. Pusey for them gradually increased, until quotes, and the prominency which is its mature growth was exhibited in given to it in their system of theology, the “opus operatum” of the sacra- we might well suppose that Scripture ment of Baptism, and in the idola describes it, as they do, as “a great trous sacrifice of the mass. At the mystery,” “the most powerful means Reformation, the most offensive of of impetration in this world," "a subthe human additions with which the lime mystery,” &c.; and that it is a sacraments were overlaid, were re- very prominent, if not the most promimoved in our Church, but these ordi- nent, topic of which Holy Scripture nances were not, we believe, restored treats. to their primitive simplicity,-to the But what is the fact? Three of the simplicity intended by their Divine Evangelists give a plain narration of Institutor. Much was retained which the institution of the ordinance, quotat the present time affords the Trac- ing the very words their Divine Master tarians a locus standi for their error. used on the occasion, in which it
Having on a previous occasion would be difficult for a mind, that made some remarks, in this periodi comes to the consideration of them cal, on the subject relative to our free from any preconceived opinion, baptismal Rituals, I would now call to discover any mysterious meaning attention to the Lord's Supper. at all. But here vain man, who
Dr. Pusey, in a recent letter to the " would be wise,” steps in, and “darkBishop of London, defends his view ens counsel by words without knowof the Lord's Supper, which had been ledge." " It was not without great objected to by the Bishop, by taking mystery,” says Bishop Taylor, “that his stand on the Prayer-book. He our blessed Lord was pleased to comadduces, also, a host of authorities in mand the representation of His death corroboration of his view from the and sacrifice on the Cross should be
made; to signify to us the sacredness Joseph to Pharaoh's butler and baker, of the Liturgy we are about, and that “ The three branches are three days,” we minister in the priesthood of Christ.” “ The three baskets are three days ;' ...“And the event of it is plainly or in his words to Pharaoh himself, this; that as Christ, in virtue of His “ The seven kine are seven years.' sacrifice on the Cross, intercedes for Those who reject the Popish figment us with the Father, so does the minister of Transubstantiation, but who neverof Christ's priesthood here.” “May it theless maintain that some mysterious please thee,” is the prayer of Bishop change takes place in the consecrated Wilson, “ O God, who hast called us bread and wine, should also maintain to this ministry, to make us worthy to that there was something very mysoffer unto thee this sacrifice for our own terious, something more than a mere sins, and for the sins of thy people.” figure, in the kine of Pharaoh. "Taking as her immoveable founda Surely, if there were any great tion,” writes Mr. Palmer,—whom Dr. mystery intended by the words of our Pusey quotes with high approbation, Lord, in instituting this ordinance, -“the words of Jesus Christ: This we should have some hint in Scripture is
my body,' and 'Whoso eateth my of such intention. But we have noflesh and drinketh my blood hath eter- thing of the kind. It would seem nal life;' she believes that the body that the unwarrantable application of or flesh, and the blood of Jesus Christ, certain passages in John vi. to the are verily and indeed given to, taken, Lord's Supper, has greatly contriand eaten by the faithful in the Lord's buted to invest the ordinance with a Supper, under the outward sign or mysterious halo. But if our Lord did form of bread and wine, which is, on intend that what He there said should this account, the partaking or com- apply to the ordinance which He had munion of the body and blood of not then instituted, to partake of the Christ." “ Hence it is that the Lord's Supper would be absolutely Church, firmly believing in the real necessary to salvation; the declarapresence of the precious and blessed tion is most solemn and positive, body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Verily, verily, I say unto you, exChrist, speaks of the Eucharist as cept ye eat the flesh of the Son of 'high' and 'holy mysteries,' exhorts Man and drink His blood, ye have no us to consider the dignity of that life in you." And in that case, when "holy mystery,' that heavenly feast,' the jailor said to Paul and Silas, tható holy table,' the “banquet of that “What must I do to be saved?' most heavenly food,' even the King Paul's reply should have been, You of kings' table. “ Human lan must eat the bread and drink the guage," says the Bishop of Tasmania wine of a holy rite, appointed by in his Lectures on the Church Cate- Jesus Christ, the Son of God, in mechism, “is inadequate to the full ex morial of His death upon the Cross planation of this sublime mystery. for our salvation; for “except ye It is not so much by argument of thus eat the flesh of Christ and drink words as by holiness of life, that we His blood you can have no life in can duly apprehend this venerable you." But Paul's reply is a key to mystery. . We hold that a great
our Lord's meaning; he said to the and mysterious change takes place in trembling sinner, " Believe on the the consecrated bread and wine; a Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be change of character, not of sub- saved.” Hence we may conclude, stance.”
that these words of Paul are synoniWe would ask, Where is the scrip- mous with that most solemn assevetural warrant for the use of such lan- ration of our Saviour. To exercise a guage as the above, in speaking of lively faith in Christ is to “eat His the Lord's Supper?' There seems to flesh, and drink His blood,” and “to be no more mystery conveyed in those feed on Him” as “the bread of life.” words of our Lord, -" This is my Wherever the Apostles preached, they body,” “This is the New Testament must have preached according to the in my blood,"—than in the words of truth conveyed in those words of their
Divine Master. They were sent to Corinthians for their abuse of this sainvite sinners to partake of “life.” cred rite) for alluding to its mysterious But since the only way of obtaining nature, which he would not have failed life was by “eating the flesh and to use, if there were any thing mystedrinking the blood of the Son of rious in it. Man,” their preaching must have Neither do we find any allusion to been an echo of those words. When, the mystery of this ordinance, much therefore, they preached, saying, “Be less any attempt to impress the minds it known unto you, men and brethren, of his readers with the greatness of that through this Man is preached this mystery, in his Epistle to the unto you the forgiveness of sins, and Hebrews; wherein, if anywhere, we by Him all that believe are justified might expect that he would treat of it. from all things,”—when such, or si- In that elaborate commentary on the milar words, were addressed by them book of Leviticus,-in that clear exto those among whom they went in position of the design of the priestexecution of this commission, they hood and sacrifices of the ceremonial were in fact expounding and setting law, not one word is to be found exforth in plain language the truth planatory of the ordinance which sufiguratively conveyed in the above perseded the Passover. If there were words of their Master.
any thing of a sacrificial character in Again, if there were any_great the Lord's Supper, as Dr. Pusey mystery in the ordinance of the Lord's maintains, (giving a meaning, they Supper, we might reasonably expect will not bear, to the words avquvnois some elucidation of it, or at least some and uinuoouvov, which he says are sareference to it, in the apostolic letters crificial words,) surely the Apostle written to the infant churches. In would not have failed to have enthose Epistles we have very clear ex- lightened us on that point, when he positions of Gospel doctrine, but not was contrasting the priesthood of one word with respect to the supposed Aaron with that of Christ, and the mystery contained in the Lord's Sup sacrifices offered by the former, with per. St. Paul, in his 1st Epistle to those offered by Him who was “a the Corinthians, does indeed refer to Priest for ever after the order of Melthis sacrament, not, however, for the chisedec." If, as Bishop Taylor obpurpose of explaining any thing mys serves in the above quotation, “it was terious in it, but simply to correct not without great mystery that our certain abuses of the ordinance, of blessed Lord was pleased to command which the Corinthians had been the representation of His death and guilty. Neither does he say one word, sacrifice on the Cross, to signify to us from which it might be inferred that that we minister in the priesthood of it was a
“great mystery.' On the Christ,” should we find not only no contrary, his language implies that instruction on this subject, but no rethe meaning of the ordinance was ference whatever to this supposed very simple, and generally well un mystery in that Epistle which exderstood by them: “I speak as to pressly and fully treats of Christ's wise men ; judge ye what I say. The priesthood and sacrifice? The only cup of blessing which we bless, is it words that can be considered as at all not the communion of the blood of referring to the Lord's Supper, in that Christ? The bread which we break, Epistle, are the following, —“We have is it not the communion of the body an altar, whereof they have no right of Christ?” In the following chapter to eat who serve the tabernacle:” he again refers to the subject; but his the most natural interpretation of words contain no more than a simple which assertion is, that the altar here statement of the institution and design referred to is the altar of the Cross on of the ordinance, (almost in the very which the Great Antitype of all the words used by our Saviour at His last Jewish sacrifices was offered. supper,) in which there is no hint of Then, again, we might fairly exany mystery. Now, here was an op- pect an elucidation of this mystery, or portunity (when he was reproving the at least some information about it, in
the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, or from a certain party in our own which were written for the express Church, or from the Fathers, we shall purpose of teaching the bishops and be led to believe that it is indeed a pastors of Christ's flock "how they rite involving the most awful mysteought to behave themselves in the ries. But if, on the other hand, we house of God, which is the Church of take our view of it from the plain letthe living God, the pillar and ground ter of Scripture, we shall be rather of the truth.” To these Epistles all mi- disposed to conclude that it is an ornisters of the Gospel should refer for dinance which the humble-minded directions as to their ministrations. Christian can have no difficulty in We look therein, however, in vain for comprehending; that it is not, as Dr. any word of counsel relative to the Pusey holds, a “propitiatory sacriLord's Supper. But should we look fice," or a “sacrificial memorial,” &c., in vain, if this ordinance were a great but a simple commemoration of the mystery,-if the celebration of it were death of Christ for our redemption. the most important duty of the minis- In Scripture there is nothing to supter of Christ? We read much in those port the fabric, which the Papists, or Epistles about diligence and faithful- Tractarians, or Fathers, or some of ness in “preaching the word;" but those of whom we hope well, have certainly no minister of the Gospel raised. can rise from the attentive perusal of Since, however, Dr. Pusey takes them, with the conviction that his his stand for his sacramental scheme first duty is to establish in his parish on the Prayer-book, it is a subject what is called “the sacramental sys- which well deserves the consideration tem.”
of every true Protestant Churchman, So much, then, with respect to the whether the Prayer-book itself should mysterious character of the Lord's not be weeded of those expressions Supper, and its prominency in the which afford Dr. Pusey his standingGospel system. The case stands ground, and which are founded not thus :
sure warrant of Holy Writ," Three of the Evangelists record its but on the writings of the Fathers, institution; it is incidentally referred derived through the corrupt medium to twice, or, at most, thrice, in the Acts. No further mention of it is made in In making the above remarks, we any other book of the New Testament, have not the remotest intention to with the exception of two references disparage the Divine ordinance of the to it in one of St. Paul's Epistles for a Lord's Supper; but we wish that the particular purpose. Even St. Peter, disfigurements with which it has been to whom that corrupt Church, which overlaid should be removed from it; has exalted this sacrament to adora being convinced that to exalt it betion, looks up as its founder and yond its proper position in the Gospel prince, says nothing in his Epistles on system, is not to honour, but to disthe subject.
honour, Him, whose great atonement, If, then, we take our view of the by way of remembrance, is shadowed holy ordinance from Roman Catholics, forth in it.
A PLEA FOR OPEN-AIR PREACHING. A LETTER ADDRESSED TO INCUMBENTS, BY THE Rev. J. H. TitcomB, M.A.
[Continued from page 29.) The importance of this subject will be pressly sanctioned by the example more distinctly opened by a conside both of our Lord and the Apostles. ration of the five proposed points, Let us contemplate for a moment our which I now invite attention.
blessed Lord. Did he confine his I. The Bible authorizes it.
teaching to the Temple in Jerusalem, This is so plain that I need scarcely or to the synagogue at Nazareth? say much upon it. We have it ex Far otherwise. Who can forget His