Page images
PDF
EPUB

AND

The answer

natural it was to go on and to imagine that sacraments might be called mys

in use in our catechism.
to both will be the same.
"Q. What do you mean by this teries.
word ordinance?

"A. I mean an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace, ordained by Christ Himself."

Thus far we see the word Sacrament is understood to mean,1st. An oath or solemn engage

ment.

2nd. A Divine ordinance.

In meditating upon these transpositions, we exonerate Tertullian from any intention of deluding or perplexing his hearers, but the vigilance of the great enemy took advantage of his inaccuracy, and of the flexibility of modern language, gradually to work his designs against the truth, through the writings of this well

3rd. An outward and visible sign meaning and christian man; indeed of grace.

if Tertullian had satisfied himself with using the word in these three senses, there would not have been so much confusion, but he gave it a greater latitude, denoting by it, sometimes the Holy Scriptures, sometimes a ceremony or institution of the Church, herein perhaps following only the Latin translation of the New Testament, as in Col. i. 26, 27; Eph. i. 9; v. 32.

*

By reflecting carefully upon this fact, it is not impossible that we may solve the difficulty alluded to by Dr. M'Neile, with regard to the application of the word Mysteries to the Sacraments. In his important pamphlet entitled "Baptism doth save,' the following passage occurs, "The enemies of Gospel truth had invented mysteries in the sacraments; it was puzzling to imagine the origin of this, but it had been skilfully adapted to secure its intended result."

If in discoursing upon the above texts, Col. i. 26, 27, and Eph. i. 9; v. 32, Tertullian used the word sacramentum instead of mystery, an impression that the terms were synonymous would gradually insinuate itself into the public mind.

If the mystery that had been hid from ages, the mystery made known to the Gentiles, the mystery of God's will, the mystery of the union between Christ and the Church, could be spoken of as sacraments, how very

See Riddle's "Christian Antiquities."

there are incidents on record which shew that Tertullian's own mind was not untainted with superstition with regard to the Lord's Supper, and therefore, without any evil design, he might, through mere human weakness, have fostered the idea of mystery in connection with that sacrament.

We now plainly perceive that in the days of this ancient Father of the Church, the three expressions

The Ordinances, The Sacraments,

The Mysteries,

were all synonymous terms and all applied to the sacred institutions of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Does not this explain the use of the term, Holy Mysteries, in our Communion Service? And may we not infer that the different senses in which Tertul

lian used the word, Sacramentum, gave rise to the perplexities that have gradually led to the sacramental system, which is now so strongly acting upon the imaginations of multitudes?

The Sacraments are lively representations of the deepest mysteries of our religion.

The sign (or Sacrament) being often taken for the thing signified, the word mystery has been applied to the sign, and devout and imaginative persons meditating upon the word inystery, have supposed a mysterious transmutation of the sign into the thing itself. Hence, Transubstantiation and Baptismal Regeneration.

TRUTH AND PEACE.

REVISION OF THE LITURGY.

A SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST AND FOR IT.

By the REV. C. H. DAVIS, M.A.,

Author of "Hints and Suggestions on a Revision of the Liturgy."

"REVISE the Liturgy," is a cry which has from time to time, since the Savoy Conference in 1661, been again and again raised in the Church of England. At the present time a wish for such a revision seems to be pre

valent in many quarters.† That such a wish is necessarily and of itself opposed to the avowed principles of the Church of England, as declared and laid down in "the Preface "to the Book of Common Prayer,‡

• Second Edition, published by Mr. J. H. Jackson, Islington Green, and Paternoster Row, London.

+ See a work entitled "Revision; or, a Wise and Timely Alteration of the Baptismal Service, &c." by "a beneficed clergyman," (Seeleys, 1850); "The Anti-Tractarian," by Hon. and Rev. R. Plunket, Dean of Tuam, (Wertheim, 1850); Letter to Lord J. Russell, on "Scriptural Revision of the Liturgy," by "a Member of the Middle Temple," (Groombridge, 1851); Lecture at Plymouth on "Revision of the Liturgy," by J. N. Bennett, Esq., (A. Hall, 1851); Dr. M'Neil's Letter to the Bishop of Exeter, "Baptism doth save," (Hatchard, 1851); Ruskin's "Notes on the Construction of Sheepfolds," (Smith and Elder, 1851); and other tracts by Rev. J. R. Pears, Rev. G. Sandby, E. T. Caulfield, Esq., W. T. Blair, Esq., &c., &c., published in 1850 and 1851; and the "Christian Guardian," for May, 1850, pp. 238-240; August, pp. 360, 361; October, pp. 461-464; November, pp. 510-512; December, p. 553; Jan. 1851, p. 30; Feb. p. 87; March, p. 97; April, p. 169, and 179; May, p. 193, and 225; Aug. p. 337, (J. H. Jackson.) See also Rev. P. Gell's "Essay on Spiritual Baptism and Communion," (Hatchard, 1847.)

"It hath been the wisdom of the Church of England, ever since the first compiling of her publick Liturgy, to keep the mean between the two extremes, of too much stiffness in refusing, and of too much easiness in admitting any variation from it. For, as on the one side common experience sheweth, that where a change hath been made of things advisedly established (no evident necessity so requiring) sundry inconveniences have thereupon ensued; and those many times more and greater than

cannot with any truth be affirmed; but yet the sincere Churchman is always apprehensive lest any such proposed revision, if ever carried into effect, should rather impair than contribute to the beauties and the excellencies of our admirable Liturgy.*

Accordingly we find that the late excellent Rev. H. Venn, writing to a friend in 1771, made the following remark, "On Saturday I dined with our bishop. I find he has no objection to a revisal and alteration of the liturgy. This change will one day, I fear, take place; and then the measure of our iniquities will be full, when we have cast the doctrine of Christ out of the public worship, avowedly as a nation."-(Life and Correspondence, p. 176.) Not that the sincere Churchman lays claim to any infalli

the evils, that were intended to be remedied by such change: So on the other side, the particular forms of Divine worship, and the Rites and Ceremonies appointed to be used therein, being things in their own nature indifferent, and alterable, and so acknowledged; it is but reasonable, that upon weighty and important considerations, according to the various exigency of times and occasions, such changes and alterations should be made therein, as to those that are in place of Authority should from time to time seem either necessary or expedient." (Preface to the Book of Common Prayer.)

*Thus the late Rev. E. Bickersteth remarked, "Our flocks who are in danger, might be preserved safe from serious misunderstanding, if all would allow the right authorities in Church and State to take measures, to leave out, or slightly change some of those expressions of our services most liable to perversion, and that have been the chief stumbling-blocks to pious minds. ... But the perils and difficulties of obtaining such a change, from the blindness and unbelief, self-willedness, short-sightedness, and corruption which subsist in all our minds and hearts, are obvious. My fear is, lest we should lose some testimony to Evangelical truth which we now have, if not wholly fail of success." (Defence of the Baptismal Services, &c., p. 23, Seeleys, 1850.)

[ocr errors][merged small]

The truth is, that although some persons would "like a little alteration here," and others would willingly "change one or two expressions there," in the Book of Common Prayer, yet that most persons are (to adopt an observation of the Rev. T. Lathbury) "anxious to preserve it unaltered," and are unwilling to entertain the question of change, lest something which they themselves value should be recommended for alteration by others." (Lathbury's History of Convocation, c. xv. p. 388.) Thus a learned and able writer speaks of the Prayer-book as having been brought to a close conformity with primitive models and with holy writ, and though not faultless, yet so free from any important imperfection, as happily to leave for modern hands little cause to attempt that arduous task of liturgical emendation." (Rev. S. Rowe's Appeal This to the Rubric, &c. p. 7., Hatchard, 1841. little work is an admirable, and truly scriptural commentary on the Liturgy, well worthy of attentive perusal.)

Thus the late Bishop Mant has observed that "At the era of the Reformation, by the agency of her sons, well versed as they were in the history and writings of the early Church, the Anglican Church compiled her form of prayer for her people, after the likeness, so far as change of circumstances would permit, in all respects, on the principles of the Catholic Church in her purest ages. In the exercise of a sound judgment upon matters indifferent or questionable, some things she chose, and others she rejected, and as the progressive light of divine knowledge beamed more clearly on her vision, clouded as it had been by the obscurity of the medieval corruptions, she continued to make successive improvements, until her Liturgy was liberated from all essential error, and attained comparative perfection." (Charges of 1842, p. 10. See also, Bishop Mant's PrayerBook, pp. vi. vii. viii., and Bishop Jebb's Pastoral Instructions, Discourses iii. and iv.)

Thus the late Rev. C. Simeon, in his third discourse on the "Excellency of the Liturgy," remarks, "From this view of our subject it will be naturally asked, Do I then consider the li

Indeed it may be the will of God that no book but His own-His own Revelation-shall be absolutely faultless.*

We adopt, then, the pious tone of a learned prelate, who truly observes, that "all members of our Church must thank God, that among the many other national blessings bestowed upon us, we possess a Liturgy, probably the most pure and apostolical which exists. The only question which admits of any doubt is, whether some reasonable objections to it may not still be obviated; whether some verbal alterations may not be made with advantage; and a further amalgamation take place in the three ser

turgy as altogether perfect? I answer, No: it is a human composition; and there is nothing human that can claim so high a title as that of absolute perfection. There are certainly some few expressions which might be altered for the better, and which in all probability would have been altered at the Conference which was appointed for the last revision of it, if the unreasonable scrupulosity of some, and the unbending pertinacity of others, had not defeated the object of that assembly." (Simeon's Hora Homileticæ, vol. ii. No. 136, p. 211.) Again, "I do not mean however to say, that a slight alteration in two or three instances would not be an improvement; since it would take off a burthen from many minds, and supersede the necessity of laboured explanations." (No. 135, p. 200.) Again, "Now then, acknowledging that our Liturgy is not absolutely perfect, and that those who most admire it would be glad if these few blemishes were removed;" &c. (No. 136, p. 214.)

It has been well observed, that "There is a natural and not blame-worthy tendency in many minds to yearn after what is perfect, and even to expect and demand it. But the more experience enlarges and matures their view, the more will they learn that, in the present dispensation, perfection is unattainable. It is well, indeed, to keep a high standard-even the highest-before us; for, to reach high, we must aim high. But a calm acquiescence, rather than vexation or despair, will be the temper of mind of one who has learned the lessons of experience, even on his twentieth failure to reach the perfection he desires. And a reasonable attachment to institutions, as well as to persons, will be founded,-not on any imaginary but unreal spotlessness, but on a high degree of excellence."(The Morning Herald, of 11th Oct., 1848.)

REVISION OF THE LITURGY.

vices which are now generally used together in the morning, by which an unnecessary repetition of the same or similar petitions, may be avoided."(Bishop Short's History of the Church of England, s. 749, p. 546.)

And when we consider the violence and the tone with which a revision of the Liturgy is urged in some quarters, it becomes those who are most attached to their Church to consi

der whether they may not, by a little timely change, stem the tide of opposition, and prevent the ultimate accomplishment of still greater and more serious changes in our timehonoured formularies. † For the learned Bishop of St. Asaph, speaking of the proposed revision in 1689, truly observes, that "it would surely be desirable, if every objection which a sober and reasonable member of the Church might make to these formu

For example, see "Revise the Liturgy," by "A Peer," (Hatchard, 1845); and Nos. 2 and 4 of the Wickliffe Club" tracts, (Partridge and Oakey, 1849); and some of the speeches at the London meeting on 28 May, 1851, in a pamphlet entitled, "The Conference on Church Reform." (Nisbet, 1851.)

+ It has been remarked with some truth that "At present the prevalent feeling of Churchmen is indifference and half allegiance to a Church with which they are not satisfied, while the Non-conformists justify their separation by dwelling on those particulars in which the Church is supposed to be assimilated to Popery. ....The longer the reformation of any institution is delayed, the more sweeping the reform when it comes.... At present we may hope that a correction of our formularies, in a few particulars,....might satisfy tens of thousands, and give stability to the Church for many generations. But if this is delayed much longer, the eyes which watch for defects will find much more to correct, and the work will fall some day into the hands of enemies instead of friends, who will be too glad if the work of restoration should prove one of demolition." (The One Cure, &c., by Rev. J. R. Pears, pp. 10, 11, and 12. Partridge & Oakey, 1850.) Speaking of those who are over-timid lest the Liturgy should be spoiled by any revision, Mr. Pears observes, that even "if nothing was left of the Liturgy, men would still have liberty to believe and teach all that is contained in the word of God, and they cannot honestly do more as it is." (p. 12.)

415

laries, were as far as possible obviated. There were many things which did then, there are some things which do now, offend the true friends of the Church of England, who willingly comply with the Liturgy and services as established by law, because they esteem the Common Prayer Book, as a whole, to be a most excellent composition, one wonderfully well suited to the purposes for which it was intended; but who, nevertheless, regard it as a human production, and therefore capable of improvement, as well as requiring, from time to time, verbal alterations, as the language of the country gradually varies. And the quiet friend of reform cannot but feel sorry that this attempt was then dropped, and has never since been carried into effect." (Bishop Short's History of the Church of England, s. 810, p. 593.)*

Nor need we fear the perpetual recurrence of capricious changes if, after one revision, the example of our American brethren were followed, who passed an Ordinance, in 1811,

Elsewhere Bishop Short, speaking of reform generally, well observes that "reforms which proceed from those in authority are almost always safe, and generally beneficial," (History, &c., s. 584, p. 422); but that "the necessity of reformation will be first visible to those who suffer most by existing abuses, and the desire of it, therefore, must spring from the people; but it can hardly produce good, unless it be managed by the upper orders, by men who are so situated as to perceive the advantage of institutions, which, however useful in themselves, have become from mismanagement liable to serious objections," &c. (s. 601, p. 447); hence, "a wise and good government will endeavour to guide the opinions of its subjects, a bad one will try to resist them; but in human affairs, that nation may be deemed fortunate in which the government gradually follows the progress of the opinions of its more enlightened subjects. (s. 491, p. 332.) With respect then, to the Established Church, Bishop Short remarks, "if there be faults but too visible in the administration of this establishment, let us pray God that they may be reformed by the steady hand of those invested with legal authority; and that neither the dilatoriness, nor the halfmeasures, of her real friends, may transfer the task of reformation to those who are hostile to the interests of our Church." (s. 819, p. 597.)

prohibiting changes from that time forward, "unless proposed at one Convention, and ratified three years afterwards at the next." (Rev. P. Hall's 66 Reliquiae Liturgica," vol. i. p. liii.) The Liturgy revised (with a caution to change nothing for the mere sake of change), and established with some such defence as this, would thenceforth be free from the danger of rash and hasty revisions.*

* For Dr.M'Neile justly reminds us that "the ipsissima verba of our Church-service, however excellent, are not given by inspiration of God. By a slight alteration, very slight, more verbal than real, the cause of truth would lose nothing, and the cause of the Church of England would gain much, by enabling her attached ministers and members to show, with more simplicity, and with less need for laborious explanations-which wear to many the appearance of evasion-the harmony of her various official documents among themselves, and with the

undeniable facts of the case by which she is surrounded." (The Church and the Churches, c. viii. pp. 400, 401. 2nd Edit. Seeleys.)

It must not be forgotten that even our authorized version of the Bible, excellent as it confessedly is, is susceptible of improvement. A revision of our present translation has been recommended by several learned divines ; among whom may be named the late Bishop Gray, of Bristol, in the concluding pages of the "Introduction" to his "Key to the Old Testament," (pp. 23-25, Tegg's Edition,) and Bishop Short, in his "History of the Church of England," s. 540, p. 382; also Professor Scholefield, of Cambridge. Several editions of the Bible have of late years appeared, printed in the paragraph form, with the omission of the "headings" of the chapters, which is a great improvement. The two first volumes of a valuable new edition of the Bible on this plan, have been published by the Religious Tract Society. The "Chronological New Testament " published by Mr. Blackader, is also a valuable edition framed on this same plan.

FITNESS FOR THE HOLY WARFARE.

"The Bishop.-Take heed that the persons whom ye present unto us, be apt and meet, for their learning and godly conversation, to exercise their ministry duly, to the honour of God, and the edifying of His Church."

"The Archdeacon.-I have enquired of them, and also examined them, and think them so to be."-The Ordering of Deacons and Priests.

In these days of talking and writing about assumption, aggression, and encroachment, it will prove, probably, one means of prevention and reformation, which we have been invited to take into our own hands,* if each ecclesiastical person in holy orders would ask himself, Do I assume, or have I assumed, more than I ought to have done? Have I been guilty of aggression, or, have I encroached on the province and special duties of others? For, if I have, whilst we have a beam in our own eye, how can we behold the mote that is in our brother's eye? The same, or a greater fault in ourselves, will prevent, and not allow of our so much as impartially searching for the hidden cause of "all our woes,' In such cases we are physically, as well as morally, disqualified for acting as physicians; and we may be met by the reproof,

* Vide Christian Guardian, p. 361.

Physician, heal thyself." Our organs of vision will not permit us either to perceive the occasion of our disorder, or enable us to remove it. “The blind" cannot skilfully perform the requisite operations on the body politic or ecclesiastic.

Now, it is to be feared that, for want of a healthy and free vision, the recent period of excitement and profession of zeal will pass away, without, in many parishes and districts, any well informed and directed effort being made, to cure and "banish" the grounds of universal complaint; because the eye of men's understanding is so affected and perverted, and withal their heart so evilly biassed, that they cannot, in their several localities and offices, attempt the civil and spiritual improvement of the souls committed to their care, without subjecting themselves to rebuke. The prophet's description, from the crown

« PreviousContinue »