Chapter I. Introduction

ALMIGHTY God in his love created all things. At the head of this lower world He placed man, giving him the power to choose, to love and serve him freely.

That this choice might be a reality, it was needful that man should have the power to reject God, and to withhold his love and service. In no other way could his will be really free. Man, thus gifted, was put on his’ trial. He failed, and so fell away from God.

But God’s love was so great that, even though rejected by man, He would not leave him to his ruin. God pursued fallen man with a love which is as astonishing as it is touching. The history of the human race is the history of God’s patient love following man, in order to bring him back to himself.

By man’s evil choice his mind became darkened, his heart polluted, and his will weakened. All along the ages we find God striving to remedy these defects, enlightening man’s mind by his truth, cleansing his heart by holy inspirations, and aiding man’s will by his power,

While God was thus dealing with the human race in general, He willed, in his wisdom, to work in a more special way within a narrower circle. At first, history tells of God’s particular dealings with individuals and families, as with the patriarchs; then with one nation, that of the Jews; and, lastly, when Christ came, with all nations without distinction.

Taking the Old Testament as our guide, we find in early times Noah thus singled out for God’s special favor. The human race had become so utterly wicked, that it was necessary to destroy it by a mighty flood. Noah and his family remained faithful; and, as a reward, God saved them in the ark from the punish ment which fell upon the ungodly. With Noah and his family, God made a covenant or agreement,1 revealing himself, and giving the primary laws of the human race. Thus the knowledge of the true God was preserved in the world.

But in time the descendants of Noah corrupted themselves, and then God, in his mercy, made choice of Abraham and his family. God now began to reveal himself more fully. He promised in solemn terms that Abraham should be the founder of a great nation, and that in him all families of the earth should be blessed. “Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him.” a

The nation which sprung from Abraham was chosen by God to be his ” peculiar people,” 3 an

elect nation. The nation thus chosen consisted of the Hebrew race, commonly known as the children of Israel, or the Jews.

Shortly after the death of Abraham, a great famine spread over the land of Canaan, where the family of Abraham dwelt. To avoid this famine, all the descendants of Jacob, number ing seventy persons, journeyed into Egypt, and there greatly multiplied. The king of Egypt fearing that, in case of war, they might side with his enemies, reduced them to slavery. From this bondage God rescued his people by the hand of Moses, whom He raised up to be their leader. Under the guidance of Moses the whole nation, now great in number, was led out of Egypt into the wilderness of Sinai, and there organized to form a Church.1 To this Church, the whole of the Jewish nation belonged. Thus organized, the Jewish Church received from God the moral law, the right of approaching him by sacrifices, the divine blessing, and, above all, the promise that from their midst should spring in due time the divine Deliverer, the incarnate God himself.

Such were the elect people, ” the Israelites, to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom as con cerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.” 2

As time went on, God raised up the prophets

to be the teachers of his people, and by them

made known further truths concerning himself,

his coming in the flesh, his sufferings and

exaltation, and the redemption of the whole human race.

It is true that God’s love and mercy were over all nations, yet it was with the Jewish Church that He thus closely dealt. Outside its pale, there was no clear revelation and no special blessing. The Gentiles, i.e., all nations other than the Jews, are described by St. Paul as “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise.”1 Our Lord himself declared that ” salvation is of the Jews; ” 3 for the Jewish Church was the covenanted sphere of God’s favor, and the home of his truth. Though promises to the nations outside the Jewish Church were given, they also depended upon the coming of the Deliverer, the Son of God made man.

” When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.” 3 His birth, his suffer ings, his rejection, and his exaltation, had been foretold in the Old Testament Scriptures. He came under the law, obeying all its precepts.

Jesus Christ did not come to destroy the old Church, and to build a new one on its ruins; but rather He caused the old Church to pass into a higher state of existence. He said, — “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” 4 He was born and lived on earth within the bounds of the Jewish Church,

» Gal. iv. 4. ” St. Matt. v. 17.

with its scriptures, laws, sacrifices, and rites; and in his own person gave to them a fuller meaning, and a new power to save and to heal the souls of men. In his person, and through his grace, the old types passed into new and living realities. Thus the Christian Church grew out of the old religion, as the leaves and flowers ‘ of a plant grow out of the stem. The Christian Church lay in the womb of the Jewish Church, and was its offspring. Our Lord himself clearly taught this continuity between the two Churches, by speaking of the Christian Church as ” Israel.” x There is but one. Israel, or chosen people, from the beginning to the end.

God’s purposed dealings with mankind through Christ, were too wonderful to be carried into effect without due warning. There was need of long and careful preparation for the In carnation, and its application in the Christian Church. This preparation was made by God by means of the Jewish Church. Its great work was to prepare the way for Christ, and for God’s fullest revelation of truth, and his richest outpouring of grace in Christ. “The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ.” 2

The prophecies, types, and figures of the Old Testament find their fulfillment in Christ him self, and the Christian Church.

The revelation of the Old Testament is com pleted in that of the New Testament.

The old sacrifices are fulfilled in the sacrifice of the Lamb of God on Calvary, and its con tinual application in the Holy Eucharist. 1 St. Matt. xix. 28. • Gal. iii. 24.

The moral law in the ten commandments is perfected, and raised to a higher meaning by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount, and made binding upon Christian people.

The priesthood is summed up and perfected in Christ, the great high priest, and continued in the Christian ministry; the hereditary de scent of the sons of Aaron finding its counterpart in the spiritual descent of the apostolic suc cession.

The royal priesthood of the Jewish nation finds its expression in the lay priesthood of the Christian Church.

The sacrament of Holy Baptism takes the place of the rite of Circumcision, and the Holy Eucharist of the Jewish Passover.

The fasts and festivals of the Jewish Church make way for those of the Christian Church, while the Jewish Sabbath passes into the Christian Sunday.

In short, the old Church was absorbed in the new; and the Jewish religion, filled with new meaning and endowed with new powers, through the coming of God in the flesh, and the outpouring of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, passed into THE CATHOLIC: RELIGION.

1 P”or an explanation of the term Catholic, the reader is referred to page 219.

“The religion of which Jesus is the author, and which the Spirit of Jesus founded on the day of Pentecost, was no mere novelty; not a system which arose aside from, and did not fall in with, the main line of the dispensations of God.

Introduction. g

The religion of Jesus is the flower, of which the Jewish Church is the bud, and the Patriarchal the stem; it is a true development and outgrowth of earlier principles. Christianity appears as the descendant of a most ancient religion, not merely as its successor, but as the interpreter of its rites, and the key to its prophecies.” — Hutchings, The Person and Work of the Holy Ghost > 4th Ed., p. 108.

Christ in the Church.

“I saw seven golden candlesticks; and in the midst one like unto the Son of Man, and He had in his right hand seven stars…. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven candlesticks are the seven churches.” — Rev. i. 12 to end.

(Illustration taken, by permission, from Grueber’s ” Pure Offering.’

Chapter II. The Foundation of the Church

THERE is in our midst a vast society named the Christian Church, — the Church of God. If we are not already members of this society, we are at least conscious of its presence. What is the origin of the Christian Church; from whence did it come; who was its founder?

To this question there is but one answer, — “The Lord hath founded Zion.”1 It was through the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and the gift of his Spirit, that the ancient Church of God passed into its catholic 01 world-wide phase on the day of Pentecost. Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man, is the founder of the Christian Church.

This is clear from our Lord’s words to St. Peter, when he confessed him. to be the Son of God, — “upon this rock I will build my Church.”3 Jesus Christ regards the Church as his own, He speaks of it as ” my Church; ” and He claims to be its founder, for He says “7 will build my Church.”

It is worthy of note that this is our Lord’s first mention of the Church. It was drawn

» St. Matt. xvi. 1 8; See Note, pp. 13, 14.

from his lips, as it were, by the first confession of the truth of the Incarnation. St. Peter was the first to confess belief in the incarnate Lord; he had just owned ” the Son of Man ” to be ” the Son of the living God.” * The promise of the Church is based upon this earliest con fession of the Incarnation, and follows it as part of one and the same great design. The Church is the kingdom of the Incarnation r it is the sacred society in which the benefits which flow from the Incarnation of our Lord are extended from age to age. The Son of God came into the world to save men in a kingdom. This kingdom is his Church. It is the new creation of which He, the incarnate Lord, is the head and the life.

The work which the Church is planned to fulfill toward mankind, is too great to rest upon any but upon God himself. A Church founded by man, would be at best but a human society, subject to change and error, and liable to pass away. Such a Church would afford no security or safety to the soul. We could not rely upon it: we could not place any con fidence in its offices toward us. Our hope of salvation in the Church, rests upon the fact that the Church is the kingdom of our incarnate Lord, — a divine kingdom of which He is the founder, and in which He has pledged himself to save men. Against this Church ” the gates of hell shall not prevail.” 2

It may be asked, — Are we joined to Christ

by being joined to the Church? or are we joined

to the Church by being joined to Christ? This

question can only be answered by saying, —

1 St. Matt. xvi. 13-20. ” Ibid. xvi. 18.

Whichever way it is, the result is the same; for the Church is one with Christ, and He is one with the Church. ” He is the head of the body, the Church.” ‘

NOTE ON CHRIST’S PROMISE TO ST. PETER. (St. Matt. xvi. 17-20.)

The Church has received no certain or fixed tradition as to what our Lord meant by “the rock” in this passage. Some of the fathers taught that Christ himself is the rock, others that the faith in his Godhead and Messiahship which St. Peter confessed is meant, others again that St. Peter is the rock. Several of the fathers held two of these opinions together, and some held ajl three. St. Augustine in his earlier writings taught that St. Peter is the rock, but he afterwards gave up that view, and held that Christ is the rock. His words are, — ” I said in a certain place of the apostle St. Peter, that upon him, as upon the rock, the Church was founded…. But I know that afterwards I most often expounded that saying of our Lord, — ‘ Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my Church* as meaning upon him whom Peter confessed saying, — ‘ Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ Let the reader choose which of these two interpretations is the more probable” (Retract, lib. i. c. 21). The fact that this great teacher changed his mind as to the meaning of the passage, and left it an open question to his readers, shews that he had no idea that any important doctrine depends on its interpretation.

It is very noticeable that, if we except the popes and persons closely associated with the Roman see, the fathers, who understand the rock to be St. Peter, in no way connect our Lord’s promise with the institution of the papacy.

St. Peter may be regarded as the rock, because he first confessed belief in the person and office of Christ, and first was nominated to be an apostle. He was first in order among the twelve, but had no jurisdiction over the rest of the apostles. He was not their lord, but their leader:

he was ‘ primus inter pares,’ i.e., first among equals. The fathers lay great stress on the equality of the apostles.

If St. Peter is a rock upon which the Church is built, we must remember that the other apostles are also spoken of as foundations of the Church (see Eph. ii. 20; Rev. xxi. 14). The power of the keys, promised first to St. Peter, was afterwards promised by our Lord to all the apostles in similar words (compare St. Matt. xvi. 19 with xviii. 18); and it was simultaneously communicated to all (St. Thomas excepted) by our Lord’s mysterious breathing, and by his words of power, on the evening of the day of his resurrection (see St. John xx. 21-24).

The Author is indebted to tht Rtv. F. W. Puller for the substanci of tht foregoing A’ufc.

Chapter III. The Ministry of the Church

I, THE FOUNDATION OF THE MINISTRY.

AS we have already seen, when Jesus Christ came, the Jewish Church, with its divinelyappointed ministry, existed in its full strength. God had taken one tribe out of the twelve to be the priestly tribe, and one family of that tribe to bear the highest office of the priesthood. His choice fell upon the tribe of Levi, and, in it, on the family of Aaron. l Members of this tribe and family alone formed the divinely-appointed ministers of the Jewish Church.

But this order, which typified the priesthood of our Lord, was not intended to continue when He came. It was the will of God that the Aaronic priesthood should pass away, and that a better and more enduring priesthood should take its place. The priesthood which was to supplant it was that which had been prefigured in the days of Abraham by the mysterious Melchisedec, of whom we read in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis.

It is important that we should see wherein the difference between the priesthood of Aaron, and that of Melchisedec lay. In what way was the latter superior to the former, that it should supplant it?

The priesthood of Aaron was hereditary, being handed down from father to son; it was but for a time, and was destined to pass away. The priesthood of Melchisedec was inherent in him self, and independent of others; it was to endure unto the end of time. Moreover, there was a feature in the priesthood of Melchisedec which was wanting in that of Aaron. Aaron was a priest simply: Melchisedec was a king as well as a priest. Melchisedec is described as ” king of Salem, priest of the most high God.” l

The priesthood of Melchisedec was fulfilled in our Lord. In the Psalms, He is described as a “priest for ever after the order of Mel chisedec.”2 In the Epistle to the Hebrews, He is five times spoken of by the same title. 3

When our Lord came, He took upon himself for our salvation the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. He was anointed by the Holy Spirit in his incarnation, and at his baptism, to be —

The prophet, who should teach man about God.

The priest, who should reconcile man to God.

The king, who should subdue man to God.

These three offices were summed up in his own person: and were bestowed upon him never to be taken from him. Now, in heaven, at the Father’s right hand, Jesus Christ is still the prophet, the priest, and the king of his Church.

He no longer exercises these offices toward the Church on earth in visible presence, but through a divinely-appointed ministry. He has been pleased to choose and to set apart a certain order of men, to represent him in his Church below.

The first of this long series of representatives to whom He gave authority to act for him, were the twelve apostles whom He chose out of the body of believers.1 Our Lord gave them the title of ‘apostles,’ i.e., those who are sent forth. The twelve apostles were men sent forth by Christ to be the prophets, or teachers, priests, and rulers of his Church. To the twelve our Lord said, — ” As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.” a Jesus chose these men to be with him, and so trained them to take, in some sense, his place when He should leave the earth.

In like manner, the apostles were divinely instructed to choose others to take their place, and to succeed to their office at death. In this way provision was made for the continuation of the ministry founded by our Lord, and for the perpetuation in the Church of his threefold mission as prophet, priest, and king.

On the eve of his ascension into heaven,

He bestowed mission or authority upon the

ministry whom He had chosen, saying, — ” All

authority hath been given unto me in heaven

l8 The Ministry of the Church.

and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” x

To show how truly Jesus Christ intended the Christian ministry to represent him in the world, He declared to its first members, — ” He that receiveth you receiveth me,” 2 and ” He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me.” 3 It is impossible to find words which shall set forth more strongly the divine origin and authority of the Christian ministry.

In the words, ” Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you,”4 Jesus Christ taught that the Christian ministry is derived from above, and not from below. Of the Christian ministry, as well as that of the Jewish Church, the words of God are true, — ” I have given your priest’s office unto you.” *

The term clergy is now used in speaking of the Christian priesthood. This word signifies those upon whom the sacred lot has fallen,— those chosen by God to a sacred office. The clergy are not only the organs of the people, they are much more than this; they are the ministers of Christ.6 Thus it is their first

1 St. Matt, xxviii. 18-20, R.V. • Ibid. x. 40.

» St. Luke x. 16. * St. John xv. 16. * Num. xviii. 7.

6 ‘ ‘ The priest may be defined as one who represents God to man, and man to God. It is moreover indispensable that he should be called by God, for no man ‘ taketh this

The Ministry of the Church. ig

duty to represent God to the people as his ambassadors. An ambassador is one who represents the king who sends him. The clergy can say, — ” We are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.”1

It is most important to notice this. The members of parliament who govern our land, receive their authority from below, — from those who choose them as their representatives: they represent the people. But the ministers of the Church receive their authority by com mission from Jesus Christ, whom they repre sent. They are the messengers, watchmen, and stewards of the Lord. Thus the authority of the priesthood of the Church of God is derived from above. The clergy are sent by God to the people. Every minister of the true Church can say, — Christ has sent me to represent him: I speak and act for him: I am his minister: I am come to minister ” in the person of Christ.” a

It is important also to.notice that when Christ sends men to be his representatives,

honor to himself.’ The Christian ministry satisfies both these conditions…. The Christian minister is God’s ambassador to men; he is charged with the ministry of reconciliation; he unfolds the will of heaven; he declares in God’s name the terms on which pardon is offered; and he pronounces in God’s name the absolution of the penitent…. Again the Christian minister is the representative of man to God — of the congregation primarily, of the individual indirectly as a member of the congregation. The alms, the prayers, the thanksgivings of the community are offered through him. He is a priest, as the mouthpiece, the delegate, of a priestly race.” — Bishop Lightfoot, The Christian Ministry, pp. 267, 268. * 2 Cor. v. 20. a See I Cor. iv. I; 2 Cor. ii. 10.

He does not part with his power; He only puts it forth. When the deputies of the king administer law in distant lands, they do not dethrone the king; they maintain and exercise his authority. It is so with the Christian ministry. Christ keeps the power in his own hands, putting it forth by means of his ministers. This truth gives the explanation of the old say ing, ubi sacerdos, ibi Christus, i.e., where the priest is, there is Christ.

The very greatness of the claim of the clergy to act ‘in the person of Christ,’ is their safe guard against pride. What room is there for self-exaltation in a system in which self is merged and lost in another, and in which the man fades and the Lord is more and more? The priesthood must never lose sight of St. Paul’s teaching, — ” We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.” *

II. THE APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

The power to act as ministers of Christ was, as already said, given by Jesus Christ in the first instance to the apostles. But this minis terial commission was not intended to be exer cised only by them, and to cease when they died. The Christian ministry was formed as the divinely – ordered means of applying the blessings of the Incarnation to mankind; and the Incarnation is not a passing event in the world’s history, but an abiding reality. The permanent character of the ministry which Christ 1 2 Cor. iv. 7.

ordained, rests upon the permanent character of his Incarnation.

Our Lord intended that the office which He bestowed upon the twelve apostles should live on, after their deaths, as long as the world lasts. The apostolic ministry is an abiding fact in a world of change.

It is true that the commission, — “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” was given to the apostles; but it was accom panied by the promise, — ” Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” * This promise was not primarily addressed to all Christian people, but only to the apostles,3 and that too in connection with the official acts of teaching and baptizing. It is as though Christ had said, — Teach and baptize all nations, and I will be with you in so doing. Moreover, He promised to be with the apostles in performing these ministerial acts ” unto the end of the world.” But how could He be with the apostles personally in their work ” unto the end of the world? ” He knew that the apostles would die like other men, and therefore the promise of being with them as individuals ” unto the end of the world,” could not be our Lord’s meaning.

” The end of the world,” of which our Lord spake, has not yet come; how then is his promise to the apostles fulfilled?

1 St. Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. * Ibid. 16.

The only possible meaning of the saying ” Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world ” is this, — I will be with the ministry of which you are but the first members, — I will be with you, and not only with you, but also with all who shall come after you in the ministry. You will die, but your office will live on, and I will be with that office in the persons of your successors, as long as the world shall last.

Thus, we have the great promise on which the doctrine of the apostolic succession rests. As Christ was with the apostles ratifying and confirming their official acts, so He has pledged himself to be with their successors as long as his mediatorial kingdom lasts. We have thus the best possible grounds for believing in the continuity of the apostolic ministry, as it now exists among ourselves.

But how was this continuity, or succession, to be secured?

It was to be secured by the apostles in their life-time providing successors to their office. As our blessed Lord ordained the twelve to be his representatives when He left the earth, so the apostles chose others to take their place when they in turn were withdrawn by death. This plan of continuing the apostles* ministry was to be carried on from age to age until the end of time. As a fact of history, it has been carried on. It is now nearly two thousand years since our Lord’s promise was made. During this long period, successors of the apostles, first receiving, and then in turn hand-

ing on the divine power and authority which Christ gave to the twelve, have never been wanting. Such successors of the apostles are with us now. The apostolic succession is the link or bond which connects the Church of the twentieth century with that of the first century.

In passing on the ministerial office to their immediate successors, the apostles used the laying on of hands. This ceremony signifies the transfer of authority, and it gave its name to the rite of ordination. Ordination is the setting apart of men to be ministers of Christ. The apostles laid their hands upon their suc cessors, and these successors in turn did the same to others. There are several instances of this method of passing on the ministerial offices in the New Testament.1 What was then done has been done ever since. Every bishop, priest, and deacon, is now set apart by the laying on of hands. By this means there has been no break in the transmission of the ministerial commission in the Church of God, from the times of the apostles down to our own day. a in.

The greatest possible care has ever been taken in this matter, to secure the true succession.

a ” The Church has a principle of perpetuity imparted to it by God through his promise, who is her head and lord. Her succession of bishops mounts up by a golden chain, link by link, to the apostles, with whom and with their successors Christ promised to be always, even to the end of the world. “”— Pusey’s sermon, The Chunk the Converter of the Heathen, p. 13.

It became a rule of the Church in very early days, that at least three successors of the apostles (or bishops as they were called), should lay their hands upon the heads of those whom they ad mitted to the highest office of the ministry.

The figure of a chain, reaching link by link from the apostles’ days down to our own times, has been used in describing the apostolic successsion. But the figure of a net is more true to fact. The connection between the chief ministers of the Church and the apostles, is not so much of the nature of a chain, as of a vast network. If by chance one strand of the net should fail, yet the whole would not be broken up. ” It has been mathematically argued that, even if we make the absurd sup position of one consecrator in twenty at any particular moment in history having been, through some accident, himself not validly consecrated, the chances will be 8,000 to i against all three consecrators in any given case being in like position.” x

The reason for this extraordinary care is to guard against the loss of the Apostolic succes sion, — a loss which would result in the dying out of the Church as our Lord constituted it. A Church stands or falls by the apostolic suc cession. We shall see in the next section that the apostolic succession is the pledge of a valid ministry, and of valid sacraments. The term valid implies the fulfillment of God’s conditions whereby certainty is secured. That which is valid rests upon the security of the divine cove nant. Without a ministry possessing Christ’s

1 Gore, 7’he Ministry of the C/iristian Church, 2nd Ed., p. 109.

authority, there can be no certainty that we possess valid sacraments conveying the grace which they express; and if there is uncertainty about the sacraments, there is uncertainty as to union with Christ. Without the divinelyappointed ministry of the Church, we have no guarantee that the flow of covenanted grace would continue. Should the apostolic succes sion die out, there would be need of a Second appointment directly by our Lord, and of a Second day of Pentecost with a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit. We need not contemplate such a disaster, for our Lord’s promise stands sure, — ” Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.”

It has been already shown that all the great features of the Christian Church are prefigured in the Old Testament. The apostolic succession is an instance of this. The chief ministers of the Jewish Church were the high priest, and the priests. They are described as the “sons of Aaron,” for they were descended from him by natural descent, the priestly powers being handed down from father to son. The apostolic succession is by spiritual descent, through the laying on of hands.

Aaron, the first high priest, was called directly by God to the office; the apostles were called by Christ himself. It was the will of God that the office of high priest should continue after Aaron’s death. At the close of his life, we read that God said, “Aaron shall be gathered unto his people…. Take Aaron and Eleazar his

son, and bring them up unto mount Hor: and strip Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son…. And Moses stripped Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar his son.” *

This custom was continued in after years, as we learn from Exod. xxix. 29, 30, — ” And the holy garments of Aaron shall be his sons’ after him, to be anointed therein, and to be consecrated in them. And that son that is priest in his stead shall put them on seven days, when he cometh into the tabernacle of the congregation to minister in the holy place.” The newly-made high priest was to wear the vestments of his predecessor to show the con tinuity of the office, and to mark its complete identity with that of his predecessor. We have in all this a great foreshadowing of the apostolic succession in the Christian Church.

Christ is gone up: yet ere He pass’d

From earth, in heav’n to reign, He formed one holy Church to last

Till He should come again.

His twelve apostles first He made

His ministers of grace; And they their hands on others laid

To fill in turn their place.

So age by age, and year by year,

His grace was handed on; And still the holy Church is here,

Although her Lord is gone.

J. M. NBALB. 1 Num. xx. 24, etc.

III. APOSTLES AND BISHOPS.

Our blessed Lord is the fountain-head of the Christian ministry. In his sacred person, He summed up all the offices of the ministry. Thus, in the New Testament He is named, —

4. DEACON, or servant as the name means.4

A sovereign sums up in himself all the lower offices of the State. The greater includes the lesser. This is true of the apostolate, or apos tolic office. In a secondary sense the apostles were founders of the ministry. St. Paul declares that the Church is ” built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets.” s All ministerial authority was lodged in them, and in their hands all official power was centered. The lower orders or grades of the Christian ministry, which were to be developed as occasion arose, lay dormant in the apostles.

The first of these orders to be called out by the apostles was the lowest order, that of the ‘ deacons.’ This was followed by the creation of a Second order, named in the New Testament, 1 elders ‘ or ‘ bishops.’ But though members of this Second order were at first sometimes called * bishops,’ they were not bishops in the special sense in which the term afterwards came to be

1 Heb. iii. I. » I St. Pet. ii. 25. s Heb. v. 6. ” St. Luke xxii. 27. s Eph. ii. 20.

used. The word bishop means ‘ overseer.’ These so-named bishops were members of the Second order who had the oversight of congregations. Thus, in the days of the apostles, there were three orders in existence, viz.: —

1. APOSTLES, sent by Christ.

2. ELDERS Or BISHOPS, 1

> sent by the apostles.

3. DEACONS, J

But when the time drew near for the apostles to depart this life, they selected members of the Second order to succeed them in the govern ment of the Church, and in the ordaining of her ministers. Such were St. Timothy and St. Titus, who were raised by the apostle St. Paul from the Second to the first order, and became heads of the Church at Ephesus. and Crete respect ively. Gradually the name ‘ bishop ‘ ceased to be applied to the Second order, and became restricted to the first order.

Upon the death of the apostles, these bishops took their place, and became chief ministers of the Church, possessing apostolic authority within particular spheres, to ordain and to bear rule over the presbyters or elders and the deacons.

The apostolate contained the germ of the Christian ministry. At first the episcopate, or order of bishops, slept in the apostolate. During the closing years of the first century, the apos tolate was merged in the episcopate. The order of apostles passed away, and that of bishops took its place as a permanent institution in the

Church. The one order grew out of the other as a branch of the apostolic stem. In a special sense the bishops became successors of the apostles, inheriting the fulness of ministerial power. The three permanent orders were now, — 2. ELDERS,1 Or PRIESTS.

Whatever confusion appears to exist as to the names given to the various grades of the Christian ministry in the New Testament, it is quite clear that from the apostles of Jesus Christ sprang the threefold order known hence forth by the titles of * bishops,’ ‘priests,’ and * deacons/ ” Without these three orders,” says St. Ignatius (A.D. no) “no Church has a title to the name.” a

This threefold order dates from New Testa ment times, and has been continued through the apostolic succession to our own days without break. Thus in the Preface to the services for ordaining the clergy of the Church, in the Prayer Book, we are taught, — ” It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient authors, that from the apostles’ time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ’s Church; bishops, priests, and deacons. Which offices were evermore had in such reverend estimation, that no man might pre sume to execute any of them, except he were

1 The original word for ‘elder’ in the New Testament is always ‘presbyter,’ which was afterwards shortened to ‘ prester,’ and then to ‘ priest.’ 3 ad Trail, iii.

first called, tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as are requisite for the same; and also by public prayer, with imposition of hands, were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful authority.”

The subject of which we are treating is of such great importance, that it is well to quote the carefully weighed words of the late Dr. Liddon. In the course of a sermon preached at the consecration of two bishops l in St. Paul’s Cathedral on St. Mark’s Day, 1885, this great preacher said, — “When we say that bishops are successors of the apostles we are not for mulating a theory, but stating a fact of history. In one sense, indeed, every presbyter succeeds the apostles; like them he ministers the Word and Sacraments of Christ. In another the apostles have no successors; they alone were privileged to found the Church of Christ, and while founding it to wield a world- wide juris diction…. If bishops do not singly share in the world-wide jurisdiction which belonged to the apostles, and which could only now be wielded by the universal episcopate acting together, they do in other respects reproduce from age to age among men the fulness of the apostolic authority.

” There are… two, and only two… theories of the origin and character of the Christian ministry. Of these one makes the

1 Bishop King of Lincoln, and Bishop Bickersteth of Exeter, were consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, eight bishops assisting at the laying on of hands. This is an illustration of the practice named on page 24.

minister the elected delegate of the congrega tion; in teaching and ministering he exerts an authority which he derives from his flock. The other traces ministerial authority to the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, who deposited it in its fulness in the college of the apostles. ‘ All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth; go ye therefore and make disciples of all nations.’ ‘As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.’ The apostles, thus invested with the plenitude of ministerial power, detached from themselves in the form of distinct grades or orders of ministry, so much as was needed, at successive epochs, for building up and sup porting the Church. First, they created an order specially charged with the care of the poor and with the administration of Church funds, although also, empowered to preach, and to administer the sacrament of baptism. Next they bestowed on the Church a larger separate instalment of ministerial power — that of the presbyters or bishops — as in those first days the Second order was called indifferently. To this order all ministerial capacity was committed, with the exception of that of transmitting the ministry. Lastly, St. Clement of Rome tells us, that, desiring to avoid controversy which they foresaw, the apostles ordained certain men to the end that, when they should have fallen asleep in death, others of approved character might succeed to their special office. Such were Timothy and Titus: not yet exclusively called bishops, but certainly bishops in the sense of the sub-apostolic and of our own age; men who, in addition to the fulness of ministerial capacity, had also the power of transmitting

it. In Crete, Titus receives explicit authority from St. Paul to ordain presbyters; at Ephesus, Timothy has particular directions from St. Paul respecting the way in which charges against presbyters are to be received. Thus we see in Timothy and Titus the exercise of what is distinctive both in episcopal orders and episcopal jurisdiction; and unless the pastoral epistles are not of apostolic origin, the three orders existed in ‘their completeness under the eyes of St. Paul. Within the compass of the New Testament, there are two other facts which point to the establishment of the episcopate in apostolic times. One is the position of St. James-the-less at Jerusalem; he seems to have been an apostle who already occupied the more localized and restricted position of a bishop. This appears in the place assigned to him at the Council of Jerusalem, and in the formal visit which St. Paul paid him at a later period, but especially in the unanimous testimony of the Second century, which spoke of him as Bishop of Jerusalem. The other fact is the representation in the Apocalypse of the ‘ angels ‘ of the seven churches. What were these angels? Guardian spirits of the churches they cannot have been, since some of them were guilty of grave faults. Nor can they have been the churches themselves, since St. John distin guishes the angels and the churches as having the distinct symbols of stars and candlesticks. Each angel represents a church, for the faith and practice of which he is responsible; and it would be difficult to express more exactly the position of a primitive bishop.” l

IV. THE EPISCOPATE, OF DIVINE ORIGIN.

Is the episcopate, or order of bishops, essential to the Church’s life, or not? Are bishops merely useful to the well-being of the Church, or are they necessary to its very existence?

To these important questions there is but one answer, and it is this; — The episcopate is of divine institution in the Church, and therefore a necessity. The old saying ‘ No Church with out a bishop,’ not only expresses a fact of history, but a great truth also. There never has been a Church without a bishop, and there never can be.

To quote the words of Sanderson,1 the learned Bishop of Lincoln (A.D. 1660): — ” My opinion is that episcopal government is not derived merely from apostolical practice or institution, but that it is originally founded in the person and office of the Messiah, our blessed Lord Jesus Christ, who, being sent by his heavenly Father to be the great Apostle,3 Shepherd, and Bishop 3 of his Church, and anointed to that office immediately after his baptism by John, with power and the Holy Ghost4 descending then upon him in a bodily shape,5 did afterwards before his ascension into heaven, send and empower his holy apostles, giving them the Holy Ghost likewise, as his Father had given him, in like manner as his Father had before sent him6 to execute the same apostolical, episcopal, and pastoral office, for the ordering and governing of his Church, until his coming

, -vol. v. p. 191, ed. Jacobson. a Heb. iii. I. I Pet. ii. 25. 4 Acts x. 37, 38.

St. Luke iii. 22. ‘ St. John xx. 21.

again; and so the same office to continue in them and their successors unto the end of the world.” J

This teaching is in accord with the testimony of the whole Church from the first, which sets forth the order of bishops as a divine institution, both permanent and necessary.

The episcopate was instituted for four great ends, viz., to be: —

i. THE FOUNT OF THE MINISTRY,

ii. THE BOND OF UNITY,

ill. THE GUARDIAN OF THE TRUTH.

iv. THE INSTRUMENT AND PLEDGE OF GRACE.

1. THE EPISCOPATE, THE FOUNT OF THE MINISTRY.

The bishops, as successors of the apostles, sum up all the offices of the Christian ministry. In the episcopate lies the germ of the three orders of the ministry; — bishops, priests, and deacons. A bishop can do all that a priest or a deacon can do. Thus, the whole work of the Christian ministry might, if need be, be per formed by the one order of bishops only. But the bishops give out, or delegate, certain of their powers to others, who are named priests and deacons. This giving out of power is termed ordination. The priesthood exercises a considerable portion of the episcopal office, but only a portion; the diaconate, or order of deacons, exercises a still smaller portion. Priests and 1 See St. Matt, xxviii. 18-20.

deacons in acting for the bishop act for Christ, whom the bishop represents.

In ordination the bishop separates certain of the laity to become clergy, and bestows upon them authority to minister as his representatives. The bishops, and the bishops only, have power to perpetuate the ministry in its various grades. They do this by handing on the authority re ceived from Christ through the apostolic succes sion. It is on this ground that the Church holds that no one can act as a minister of Christ, either lawfully or validly, without ordina tion by a bishop.

As Hooker says, — ” Whereas presbyters (i.e., priests) by such power as they have received for administration of the sacraments, are able only to beget children unto God; bishops, having power to ordain, do by virtue thereof create fathers to the people of God.” l

ii. THE EPISCOPATE, THE BOND OF UNITY.

The episcopate, or order of bishops, exists as a safeguard from schism or division. Those who separate themselves from their lawful bishops become schismatics. To separate from the bishops, is to separate from the Church of which the bishops are the rulers. Loyalty to the rulers of the State is the bond of union in the nation; when this loyalty is withheld, dis union or revolution is the result. To separate from the bishops is an act of disloyalty to Jesus Christ, whose representatives they are.

The idea of the episcopate as a bond of unity is strongly insisted upon by early writers. For 1 Eccl. Polity, vii. 6. 3.

example, St. Ignatius (A.D. no), the great and glorious martyr, bishop of Antioch, and a disciple of the Apostle St. John, wrote, — ” He who does anything apart from the bishop, and presbytery, and deacons, is not pure in his conscience.”1 ” For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ, they are with the bishop.” 2 St. Ignatius is but enlarging upon the teaching of the New Testament, where the continuing in ” the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship,” 3 is named as a mark of Church unity.

In the writings of Tertullian (A.D. 200), we learn that certain bodies claiming to belong to the Church were thus challenged, — ” Let them produce the account of the origins of their churches; let them unroll the line of their bishops, running down in such a way from the beginning that their first bishop shall have had for his authorizer and predecessor one of the apostles, or of the apostolic men who continued to the end in their fellowship.”‘*

St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage and martyr (A.D. 250), sets forth the unity of the episcopate as the pledge of the unity of the Church. Of his teaching we shall read in a later chapter of this book.

Thus we see that in very early times, the order of bishops was regarded as the bond of unity in the Church.

ili. THE EPISCOPATE, THE GUARDIAN OF THE TRUTH.

As the guardian of the true faith, the episcopate is the guarantee against heresy. Heresy

1 ad Trail. 7. * ad Philad. 3.

» Acts ii. 42. * De prescript, c. 32.

is false doctrine obstinately held or taught. The true faith was revealed by Christ and his Holy Spirit to the apostles in all its completeness. The apostles handed down this body of teaching to their successors, the bishops. By this means the true faith was to be preserved in the world. St. Paul alludes to this mode of handing down the truth in his words to Timothy, the first bishop of Ephesus. He writes, — ” Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. That good thing which was committed unto these keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.” r ” The things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faith ful men, who shall be able to teach others also.”* St. Paul is speaking of the deposit of Christian truth, which was entrusted to Timothy, as a bishop, to uphold and to guard.

St. Irenaeus (A.D. 175), in speaking of the succession of bishops in the local Church of Rome, says, — “The blessed apostles (St. Peter and St. Paul), then having founded and built up this Church, committed the ministry of the episcopate to Linus. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistle to Timothy. Anacletus succeeds him. After him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement obtained the episcopate, who had both seen the blessed apostles, and been with them, and still had the preaching of the apostles ringing in his ears, and their tradition before his eyes.”3 St. Irenaeus, in speaking of Polycarp, goes on to

1 2 Tim. i. 13, 14. * Ibid. ii. 2.

say, — ” And Polycarp, too, not only having been instructed by the apostles, and having lived continually with many who had seen Christ, and having also been appointed by apostles bishop in Asia, in the Church at Smyrna…. uniformly taught these things, which he had also learned from the apostles, which also the Church hands down, which also alone are true.”1

One of the chief duties of the episcopate is to hand on the Christian faith, whole and undefiled, as it came down from the apostles of Jesus Christ. To aid the bishops along the ages in this great task, our Lord promised the guidance of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of truth. His words are, — ” I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever; even the Spirit of truth.”2

This great promise is similar in its terms to that in which our Lord pledged himself to be with the Apostles ” alway, even unto the end of the world.” 3 In each case the promise of the divine presence was made in the first instance to the apostles, but made in such terms as to include their successors, the bishops, throughout all time. Our Lord will be with the apostles ALWAY; the Spirit of truth will abide with them FOR EVER. But as the apostles soon after died, it is clear that these promises were made not to the apostles only as individuals, but as representatives of the Christian ministry, of which they were the first members. In no other way could the twofold presence of Christ

1 Quoted by Pusey, The Rule of Faith, p. 66. ” St. John xiv. 16, 17. » St. Matt, xxviii. 20.

and his Spirit be vouchsafed ” alway,” and ” for ever,” but to the successors of the apostles, the bishops of the Church.

It is also to be observed that the idea of teaching is specially connected with both these passages. Our Lord’s presence is guaranteed to the apostles and the bishops in “teaching the nations to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you;”1 the Holy Spirit will ‘be with them “for ever” as “the Spirit of truth.”2 The same blessed Spirit who revealed the truth to the apostles enabled their successors to witness to that truth.

When heresy sprang up, it was exposed and rejected by the bishops, acting alone or in council. The Councils were great assemblies of bishops of the Church. In these Councils, the bishops declared the true faith as it had been handed down to them from the apostles. They restated the old faith from the beginning, as they had received it.

As an example of this, we may instance the heresy of Arius, who denied the Godhead of our Saviour. Three hundred and eighteen bishops met in council at Nicaea in the year 325, and condemned the heresy, by declaring the truth which they had received through their predecessors from the apostles. ” So have we received” was the witness they bore. We have their statement of faith in the Nicene Creed, which attests, with all possible fulness, the Divine Nature of our Lord Jesus Christ. This decision was received by the whole Church, and thus we are certain that it has the authority of the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of truth.

1 St. Matt, xxviii. 20. ” St. John xiv. 16, 17.

As other heresies arose, they were met and condemned in like manner; the bishops speaking out, and the Church at large confirming their decisions.

iv. THE EPISCOPATE, THE INSTRUMENT AND PLEDGE OF GRACE.

The streams of grace flow in the Church through the sacraments, which are called ‘ the channels of grace.’ Our Lord committed the * sacraments to the keeping of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and clergy of the Church. St. Paul speaks of the clergy as “stewards of the mysteries of God.”1 These ” mysteries ” are certain deep truths revealed by God, which pass the understanding, such as 1 the mystery of the Holy Incarnation; ‘ but chiefly and above all, ” the mysteries of God ” mean the sacraments, called in all parts of the Church by the name of ‘ the holy mysteries.’ Of these sacraments the bishops and clergy are the stewards, — the guardians and dispensers.

The sacraments can be duly celebrated only by those who have been authorized by Christ; that is, by the apostles and their successors. This is true not so much as a matter of mere order, but as resting on our Lord’s revealed will. Unless the sacraments are ministered by persons duly qualified, there is no security that they convey grace. Thus it comes about that the bishops, and those sent by them secure the channels of grace; in other words, the means of grace depend upon a lawful ministry.

The power and authority to minister the sacraments was given by Christ in the first 1 i Cor. iv. I.

instance to the apostles, to be handed on by them to the bishops who succeeded them. In the words, — ” Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” T Christ instituted the sacrament of Holy Baptism.

In the words, — ” Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remem brance of me This cup is the new

testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me,” 2 He ordained the sacrament of his Body and Blood.

In the words, — ” Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them,” 3 He instituted the ordinance of Absolution.

” There is not in the world ” says Bishop Jeremy Taylor “a greater presumption, than that any should think to convey a gift of God, unless by God he be appointed to do it.” 4

To say, * I baptize these,’ or ‘ This is my body,’ and * This is my blood,’ or ‘ I absolve these/ would be presumptuous, unless the person who used these solemn words was duly authorized by God to do so. There is, moreover, no guarantee that such words would effect what they mean, unless used by competent persons, that is to say by the bishops and those sent by them.*

* The Rule of Conscience. Book iii. Chapter iv. Rule 12.

5 In cases of extreme necessity, where no minister of the Church can be had, baptism by a layman or a woman, with water and in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, though irregular, has been recognized as valid.

Thus we see, that the episcopate is the warrant or guarantee of sacramental grace. Those bodies of Christians who have lost the apostolic succession, have lost with it the divine warrant of such grace. God may excuse those who act in ignorance, and He may reward their faith by some gift of grace; but if so, it is as outside the covenant, and such grace is * uncovenanted grace,’ and there is an element of uncertainty about it.

To sum up what has been said in this chapter, we may add, that to be united to the Body of Christ, which is the Church, — to know the truth, — to be assured that we are within the covenanted sphere of grace, — it is needful to place ourselves under the rule, guidance, and ministry of the bishops of the Church of God. In the words of St. Ignatius, —

” WHERE THE BISHOP APPEARS, THERE LET THE PEOPLE BE, AS WHERE JESUS CHRIST IS, THERE IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.” z 1 ad Smyrn. &

Chapter IV. Grades Amongst the Bishops of the Church

Christian ministry, consisting of the three orders of bishops, priests, and deacons, has already been shown to be of divine institution. It cannot therefore be changed to any other form of ministry, and it will continue to be the ministry of the Church until the end of the world.

But as the Church grew and spread in the world, it was found convenient to make distinctions of rank in each of the three orders of the ministry. This was specially the case with the bishops, the chief ministers of the Church.

In early times bishops were much more numerous than they are now. Every city had its bishop, and at first all bishops were equal. But as time went on, it came about quite natur ally that the greater the city, the greater was the dignity of its bishop; the rank or civil importance of the city passing on to its bishop. And it followed quite naturally, too, that the bishops of smaller towns in surrounding districts or provinces, placed themselves under the pro tection and guidance of those of the greater cities. This is the origin of what is known

as ” the provincial system,” which was not long in becoming universal, covering the whole ground of the Church.

This plan of grouping the Churches of a province under the bishop of its chief town, came about as a matter of Church order or organization: it was no part of the divine institution of the ministry, or of the divine constitution of “the Church. The bishops at the head of provinces were styled metropolitans, a name derived from the word ‘ metropolis/ the mother city or capital.

The Rev. F. W. Puller, in treating of the rise of metropolitans, writes, — “As a rule, Christianity would get a footing first in the metropolis of each region. The other lesser cities would be evangelized by missions sent forth from thence; and so the suffragan sees would look on themselves as daughters of the metropolitical see. The metropolitan bishop was the natural center of unity for the bishops of the province. When a see became vacant, it would be the metropolitan who would call together his brother bishops to consult about the appointment of a worthy pastor to succeed to the empty throne; and the metropolitan would naturally preside at the preliminary meetings for consultation and election, as well as at the consecration service itself. If troubles arose among the bishops, whether heresies or schisms or quarrels or other wrong doings, or if new and difficult questions emerged, con cerning which it seemed desirable that the neighbouring bishops should act together, it would be natural for the bishops to meet in synod, and it would also be natural that the

metropolitan should take the initiative and summon his brethren; and the metropolis would normally be the obvious place of meeting. Under such circumstances the metropolitan would of course preside, and in most cases he would be entrusted by the synod with the duty of seeing that its decisions were carried out. Thus, by the natural course of events, and by the free action of the essentially co-equal prelates, a certain precedence and pre-eminence, and, more than that, a certain right of initiative and of inspection and of administration, would by common consent be lodged in the occupant of the metropolitical see.” *

In time “the provincial system” developed in some parts of the Church, but never univer sally, into what is known as ” the patriarchal system.” The provinces of which we have spoken varied considerably in size. The first bishop of a large province would naturally be regarded as a more important person than the first bishop of a small province. Moreover, the bishop whose seat happened to be in a city of great importance, would possess a corresponding influence. In certain regions particular groups of provinces became subject to the bishops of the greater cities. Among the great cities of the world in the early days of Christianity were Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. These cities owed a further prominence in the eyes of Christians to their connection with great anames in the Church. Thus both St. Peter 1 The Primitive Saints and the See of Rome, pp. II, 12.

and St. Paul had spent some time in Antioch. Rome received the apostolic succession from St. Peter and St. Paul,1 and both of these apostles were martyred and buried there; the Church of Alexandria was founded by St. Mark the Evangelist. To this list must be added Jerusalem, the Mother-Church of Christendom, which owned St. James, a relative of our Lord, as its first bishop. Later on Constantinople, as it rose into fame as the emperor’s seat, and as the Second city in the world, was added to the list. The bishops of these cities were re garded as men of rank in the Church, and upon them, in time, was bestowed the title of * patriarchs,’ — a word which signifies ‘ the heads of families.’ The groups of provinces under the care of these patriarchs were named * patri archates.’ The patriarchs presided over the metropolitans, who in turn presided over the bishops of provinces. In the West, during the middle ages, the chief archbishops who presided over national Churches, were called * primates.’ The patriarchates were five in number; four being situated in the East, and one in the West. The patriarchates in the East were Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jeru salem; while that in the West was Rome.2 The

1 St. Irenseus in speaking of the local Roman Church writes:— “The blessed apostles (St. Peter and St. Paul) having founded and built up the Church (of Rome) com mitted the episcopate to Linus.” — Iren. iii. 3.

9 The claim of Rome to be the patriarch of the whole West rested on State legislation, and from a Church point of view was unauthorized. Even North Italy under Milan maintained its independence for a long time. North Africa can hardly be said to have ever yielded to the Roman patriarchate. Gaul did not submit until forced to do so by the emperors. The ancient British Church was inde-

patriarchates took their names from the cities in which the patriarchs resided. The patriarchs were regarded as the five presidents of the Church. Among the patriarchs, the custom of the Church allowed grades in rank of honor. The first place was naturally given to Rome, because Rome was the capital of the empire, and also from its connection with the greatest of the apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul. If religious considerations alone had determined the order of precedence, Jerusalem must have ranked first. Next to Rome, in rank of honor, came Constantinople, as being the seat of the Roman Emperor and his court, and hence called New Rome. In the general Council of Chalcedon held A.D. 451, it was enacted that ” as the fathers fitly bestowed precedence upon the throne of Old Rome because it was the imperial city, and the 150 bishops most beloved of God ” — i.e., the fathers of the Second general Council A.D. 381, — “moved by the same con sideration, awarded equal precedence to the most holy throne of New Rome,” i.e., Con stantinople, “judging reasonably that the city honored by the seat of the Empire, and by the Senate, should enjoy equal rank with the old imperial Rome, and like her be magnified in ecclesiastical matters, having the Second place after her.”

To sum up what has been said, we again quote the words of the Rev. F. W. Puller, —

pendent of any patriarch. Originally the Roman jurisdiction was limited to the seven provinces of Central and Southern Italy, and to the three islands of Corsica, Sardinia, and Sicily. The subject is fully treated in Puller’s Primitive Saints.

” By divine right all bishops were inherently equal, but by custom and ecclesiastical legis lation the bishops of the metropolitical sees acquired certain rights, which were delegated to them by their brother bishops. Moreover, among the most important Churches a certain order of precedence grew up, which corres ponded with the civil dignity of the cities in which those Churches existed; and, finally, the Churches which were founded by the apostles were treated with peculiar reverence.” l We must be careful to note, that, while the distinc tion between bishops, priests, and deacons, is a matter of divine appointment, these grades among bishops are not so. They were made for the sake of convenience in the better govern ment of the Church. The distinctions are distinctions of honor, and of influence, and of strictly limited jurisdiction, and are useful as a matter of Church order; they are not essential to the Church’s life. St. Cyprian teaches this, when he speaks of our Lord “giving to all the apostles an equal power,” and of their being “endued with an equal fellowship both of honor and power.”2 St. Jerome, writing A.D. 393, says likewise, — -“wherever there is a bishop, whether it be at Rome, or Eugubium, whether it be at Constantinople, or at Rhegium, whether it be at Alexandria, or at Zoan, his dignity is one, and his priesthood is one… all alike are successors of the apostles.” 3

Chapter V. The Ends for Which the Church Exists

FROM what has been already said in this work, it may be gathered that the Church of God is a divine society, existing in the world for great ends. At the risk of some slight repe tition, it will be useful to dwell briefly upon the chief purposes for which the Church exists in our midst.

Our blessed Lord, by his incarnation, brought the fulness of grace and truth to the earth. ” The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us… full of grace and truth.” ” Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” x He wills to bestow his grace and to make known his truth in and through his Church. In Holy Scripture, the Church is described as “the bride”2 or spouse of Christ. It has been said that the spouse of Christ has two breasts, the breasts of grace and truth, by which she nourishes her members. Thus we are to regard the Church as, —

I. THE SPHERE OF GRACE. II. THE HOME OF THE TRUTH.

and hence as, — III. THE ARK OF SAFETY.

Man is a creature gifted with intelligence, affection, and will. By a right use of these endowments, he is by nature able in some measure to know, to love, and to serve God. That he may be able to do these things more perfectly, God adds to man’s natural endow ments a supernatural gift, that is to say, a gift above nature. This supernatural gift is termed grace. By grace man is lifted out of the natural order, and placed in a higher condition. This higher condition is known as a ‘ state of grace.’ In a state of grace man is able to know, to love, and to serve God more perfectly.

God has organized his Church as the sphere in which man may, in this life, be received into a state of grace. It is in the Church that Christ lifts us out of the order of nature, and places us in the state of grace, and thus fits us for the life of glory in heaven. The Church of God on earth is the highway of grace; the sure and trustworthy road along which we may pass to glory. It is in the Church, and through the Church, that our Lord Jesus Christ still carries on his work of saving men by uniting them to himself. The Church is the scene of his promised action upon souls, a sort of Palestine or Holy Land in which He is still pleased to work. Within the Church, we are within the circle of covenanted grace. Outside the Church there is neither the warrant nor the certainty of grace.

In the words ” I am the vine, ye are the branches,” J our Lord teaches a great truth.

As the sap flows from the vine through the branches to the foliage and fruit, so his grace flows through the Church to her members. It is the office of the Church, through the agency of the Holy Spirit, to put men in union with, and to keep them in union with, Jesus Christ, the Author of grace.

II. THE CHURCH, THE HOME OF THE TRUTH.

The Church is a divine society to which are entrusted the treasures of grace and truth for the benefit of mankind. We have seen that in the ages before God was made man, He was gradually disclosing his truth to mankind as they were able to bear it. This disclosing is commonly called ‘ revelation.’ God’s revelation was complete in Jesus Christ. He, as God made man, was “full of truth.” Jesus said — ” I am the Truth.” x He came to bring the truth in all its fulness to mankind.

The sum of truth was communicated by Christ through the Holy Spirit to the Church, in the person of her first leaders. To the apostles our Lord said, — ” But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father shall send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remem brance whatsoever I have said unto you;” and again, — ” When He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth.” 2 In this manner the early Church became possessed of all the truth. St. Jude tells us that ” the faith was once delivered unto the saints.” 3 The

word “once,” here means literally “once for all,” or “once only.” The Church might be called upon to explain and enlarge upon the faith thus given, but she could never add to it.

This faith or truth was ” delivered unto the saints,” i.e., to the Church as its divinelyappointed guardian. The truth of God was too precious a treasure to be cast loose among mankind, and so left to take its chance in the world. It needed a home in which it might be preserved free from human error, and a guardian which should keep it and hand it down unim paired to future ages. Such a home and such a guardian is ” the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”1 As Dr. Gore says, — ” It is conceivable that our Lord might have proclaimed a certain body of truth, and then left it to make its own way, to advance by its own weight among mankind. He might have scattered truth at random, like ‘ bread upon the waters,’ over the area of human need. But in fact He did something different, He enshrined the truth deliberately in an organized society.” 2

It is the office of the Church to explain aright Christ’s teaching. This duty she is enabled to fulfill through the aid of the Holy Ghost, who abides with the Church. Man needs a trust worthy teacher of the ‘doctrine of Christ; such a teacher is the Church of God. She is a teacher holding a divine warrant, and her warrant rests upon the words of her Lord, — ” Go ye there fore, and teach all nations, baptizing them… teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you

alway, even unto the end of the world.” J The Church is the heaven-born teacher of the truth.

III. THE CHURCH, THE ARK OF SAFETY.

The Church being by God’s appointment the sphere of grace and the home of the truth, it follows that there can be no safety outside the Church. This conclusion applies to all those to whom the Church has been sufficiently proposed, and who have had the opportunity of entering her fold. We are not called upon to give judgment as to the final state of those who remain and die outside the Church on earth. ” Them that are without God judgeth.” a While rightly anxious about their salvation, we must leave them to the mercy of God who alone knows whether they have heard and rejected his call to enter the true fold. We may hope that those who had not the chance of joining the Church on earth, or who never realized her claims, may, if they have been true to conscience, be received into the Church during the time of waiting between death and the last judgment. 3

1 St. Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. » I Cor. v. 13.

3 “They are members of the soul of the Church, who, not being members of the visible communion and society, know not, that in not becoming members of it, they are rejecting the command of Christ, to whom by faith and love and in obedience they cleave. And they, being members of the body or visible communion of the Church, are not mem bers of the soul of the Church, who, amid outward profession of the faith, do, in heart or deeds, deny him whom in words they confess. The deliverance promised in that day, is to those who, being in the body of the Church, shall by true

” All knowledge of religion is from (God), and not only that which the Bible has trans mitted to us. There never was a time when God had not spoken to man, and told him to a certain extent his duty… We are expressly told in the New Testament, that at no time He left himself without witness in the world, and that in every nation He accepts those who fear and obey him. It would seem, then, that there is something true and divinely revealed, in every religion all over the earth, overloaded, as it may be, and at times even stifled by the impieties which the corrupt will and under standing of man have incorporated with it. Such are the doctrines of the power and presence of an invisible God, of his moral law and governance, of the obligation of duty, and the certainty of a just judgment, and of reward and punishment, as eventually dispensed to in dividuals; so that revelation, properly speaking, is an universal, not a local gift; and the dis tinction between the state of Israelites formerly and Christians now, and that of the heathen, is, not that we can, and they cannot attain to future

faith in Christ and fervent love to him belong to the soul of the Church also, or who, although not in the body of the Church shall not, through their own fault, have ceased to be in the body, and shall belong to its soul, in that through faith and love they cleave to Christ its head.” — Pusey, The Minor Prophets ^ on Joel ii. 32. In this passage Dr. Pusey is contrasting the condition of pious dissenters and others, with that of unworthy members of the Church, and considers that the former are more safe than the latter. He holds that dis senters of good life, though not members of the body of the Church, are nevertheless members of the soul of the Church; while Churchpeople of bad life, though members of the body, are not of the soul of the Church, and hence that the former ve moie acceptable to God than the latter.

blessedness, but that the Church of God ever has had, and the rest of mankind never have had, authoritative documents of truth, and appointed channels of communication with him. The Word and the Sacraments are the char acteristic of the elect people of God…” ‘

When men realize that the Church is a divine institution, the body of Ch rist, the temple and the organ of the Holy Ghost, the covenanted sphere of grace and truth, it becomes to them a matter of the highest importance to know where the Church is, that they may belong to

it, and so be within the Ark of Safety.

/

Chapter VI. The Divisions in the Church

THE idea of unity underlies all the figures by which the Church is described in the New Testament. The Church is there spoken of as, — the kingdom of heaven, the body of Christ, the temple of God, the bride, the branches of the vine. There is but one king dom, one body, one temple, one bride, one vine. This “oneness” or unity, exists in reference to Jesus Christ; He is the king of the kingdom, the head of the body, the builder of the temple, the bridegroom, the vine. The great thought running through all the New Testament descrip tions of the Church, is that of the Church’s unity in itself through its union with Jesus Christ.

In the New Testament, the word Church is used in two senses. It is used, as it has been used so far in this book, of the one divine society founded by Jesus Christ. Again, the word is used of lesser parts of the one Church, as, for instance, when we read in the Revelation of St. John the divine of the seven Churches of Asia.1 But we are not to suppose that such Churches were independent or rival bodies of Christians; they were merely portions of the 1 i. ii.

one world-wide society which Christ described as “my Church.” ‘

The unity of the Church rests upon Jesus Christ, its divine founder and head. The Church is one in itself, because it is one with him. The Church is one in him, and one with him. Of this unity the episcopate, or order of bishops, is the pledge. This is the view taken by St. Cyprian in his great work ” on the Unity of the Church.” In commenting on St. Paul’s words, — “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all…,” a St. Cyprian writes, — ” This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially our bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be one and undivided. Let no one deceive the brotherhood by false hood; no one corrupt the truth of our faith by a faithless treachery. The episcopate is one; it is a whole, in which each enjoys full posses sion. The Church is likewise one, though she be spread abroad and multiplies with the increase of her progeny; even as the sun has many rays, yet one light; and the boughs of a tree are many, yet its strength is one, seated in the deep lodged root: and as when many streams flow down from one source… unity is preserved in the source itself.”3

St. Cyprian teaches that the unity of the Church depends upon the unity of the order of bishops sent by Christ, and upon the sacra-

ments which they minister. He teaches that the episcopate forms but one undivided body, each bishop being in direct communication with Jesus Christ, and the minister of his grace, which is the life of the Church.

Thus the unity of the Church is not destroyed by death, for death cannot sever union with Christ. The greater part of the Church is not now on earth: only the lower limbs of the body of Christ are upon earth. The great majority of Christians are in the next world, where they are still in the unity of the Church; for they are one with Christ, who is the center of unity. The center of unity is not on earth, but in heaven.

But what about the sad divisions in the Church on earth, which are only too painfully visible? These divisions are, to everyone who realizes what Christ meant his Church to be, a cause of sorrow and shame. The divisions in the Church are a spectacle at which angels weep, while devils rejoice. From the first, such divisions were not uncommon. St. Paul speaks of them in his Epistles more than once. These early divisions were generally of brief duration, affecting, while they lasted, but small portions of the Church. But as time went on, greater and more serious disunion took place, which has lasted for centuries, and still con tinues. First and foremost, there is the division between East and West, which dates from the twelfth century; and later, there is that further division which took place in the West between the Church of Rome and that of England, a large part of Germany, and other Europewu countries, which has already lasted for 300 yeaii.

Let us briefly consider the causes which led to these lamentable divisions in the Church.

First, we will speak of the great and dis astrous division between East and West; — We can trace the working out of this great rent in the Church to various causes. Among these we may instance the use of different languages. The theological language of the East was Greek, that of the West was Latin. As fresh heresies arose, new words had to be coined to state the truths assailed. It is not hard to see what grave difficulties would arise in selecting terms which, while they shut out error, con veyed the same meaning to persons of different languages. Dr. Newman says, — “The diffi culties of forming a theological phraseology for the whole of Christendom were obviously so great… not only had the words to be adjusted and explained which were peculiar to different schools or traditional in different places, but there was the formidable necessity of creating a common measure between two, or three languages, — Latin, Greek, and Syriac. The intellect had to be satisfied, error had to be successfully excluded, parties the most contrary to each other, and the most obstinate, had to be convinced.”1

A Second and more serious cause of separation between East and West, arose in reference to what is known as the ‘ filioque clause ‘ in the Nicene Creed. This Creed, as its name shows, was first drawn up by the General Council held 1 Arians of the Fourth Century, Appendix, pp. 433, 434.

at Nicaea A.D. 325, to which we referred on page 39.

As the Creed left the Council, it concluded with the words, — ” And I believe in the Holy Ghost.” On the rise of a new and dangerous heresy which denied the Godhead of the Holy Ghost, a Second General Council was called. One hundred and fifty bishops assembled at Constantinople, A.D. 381, and proceeded to enlarge upon the Creed of Nicaea. In its completed form, the conclusion of the Creed ran thus, — ” And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord, and the Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. And I believe One Catholic and Apostolic Church, I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the Resurrection of the dead, and the Life of the world to come.”

It will be observed that the words ” and the Son” (in Latin “filioque”), to which we are accustomed, coming after ” Who proceedeth from the Father,” are here omitted. As the Creed was accepted by the Council, ‘ the filioque clause ‘ was not yet added.

How did the words ” and the Son ” find their way into the Nicene Creed, as we now know it in the West? “It was first introduced in reciting the Creed in Spain, apparently from ardent zeal in resisting the Arian heresy which had spread there in great force. The use extended from thence into France and Italy, and after a while the Roman see accepted and sanctioned it. This occurred in Charlemagne’s time.”1

It is certain that no difference of doctrine was intended, but the Easterns at once objected to the addition on the ground that it was unauthorized. They held that no change could be made in a Creed which was received from a General Council, without the consent of a Council of equal authority. We are in justice bound to admit that their objection was a good one. A great dispute was raised, in which the Bishop of Rome supported the unauthorized addition. The Eastern Church has consistently maintained the objection all along, and main tains it still.

A third cause of division between East and West, lay in a long series of disputes between the bishops or patriarchs of Rome and Con stantinople. Of these it is most painful to speak. They can only be described in the words of the Gospel, — ” there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.”

The early councils allowed the first place among the five patriarchs of the Church to the Bishop of Rome. But it was a primacy of honor, and not of authority, — a primacy of leadership, and not of lordship. His position in regard to the other chief bishops of the Church, was somewhat similar to that of the foreman in regard to other members of a jury. The patriarch or pope of Rome was regarded as ‘ primus inter pares,’ i.e., first among equals; but no grant of lordship over his brother-bishops was allowed him. In the disputes of which we are speaking this was forgotten, the bishops of Rome claiming unlawful superiority over the bishops of Constantinople. There were doubt-

less grave faults in a lack of love and humility on both sides; but in truth it must be admitted that the bulk of the blame of the division lay with the bishops of Rome. A study of history leads to the conclusion that the Roman claims lay at the root of the schism between East and West.

Such were the causes which led to the most lamentable disaster which has ever overtaken the Church of God, the great division between East and West, — a schism which has already lasted for more than 700 years, and still remains unhealed.

The Second great rift in the Catholic body is that which took place in the West, chiefly between the Roman and Anglican Churches in the sixteenth century. Of this sad division, and the causes which led to it, we shall have occasion to speak more fully in the Second part of this work.

The divisions between East and West, and between Rome and England, may be described in St. Paul’s language as ” schism in the body,” rather than schism from it. No one of these three portions of the Catholic body lost any of the essentials of Church unity; — the possession of the apostolic succession, the divinely-appointed sacraments, the creeds, and the moral law.1. x “The communion of Christians one with another, and the unity of them altogether, lie, not in a mutual under standing, intercourse, and combination, not in what they do in common, but in what they are and have in common, in their possession of the succession, their episcopal form, their apostolical faith, and the use of the sacraments. Mutual intercourse is but an accident of the Church, not its essence.” — Newman, Tract 90, § 12.

There is good reason to believe that the divisions in the Church are of such a nature, that her organic unity through union with Christ and the indwelling of his Holy Spirit, has not been broken. There is such a thing as internal unity, as well as external unity. We believe that external unity may be broken, while internal unity remains undisturbed; or as Dr. Pusey puts it, that ” suspended inter-communion alone does not destroy unity.”

These divisions in the body are of the nature of serious wounds, rather than of amputation of limbs. They are as deep fissures or cracks upon the surface of the earth, which do not separate the earth into two or more worlds. We may regard the divisions in the Church under the figure of a serious quarrel among brothers, by which the natural bond of a common parentage is not broken. Brothers may be disunited, but they remain brothers still.

The only thing which can mortally affect the unity of the Church, is the loss of any of the essential links ordained by our Lord to keep us united to himself. We may believe that nothing was done in either of the cases we are considering, to cut off any of the portions of the Catholic Church from Jesus Christ.

At present the Eastern, the Roman, and the Anglican portions of the Church, make up the Catholic body— the Universal Church.1 ” The Church is to be regarded as the divinely-

1 “Unknown in face, in place separate, different in language, opposed, alas! in some things to one another, still before the throne of God they are One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.” — Pusey, Eirenicon I, p. 57.

ordained organ and keeper of doctrine and the means of grace, and as standing or falling by the apostolic succession. And as this can only be found in the three great Churches whose continuity has never been interrupted, — the Western, Eastern, and English, — these three together make up the true universal Church. The body of the Church, one in origin, has in course of time, through the sin of man, by divine permission, become divided into three great branches — outwardly separated, but in wardly united — which, when the right time is come, will grow together again into one tree, overshadowing the world with its foliage.” l No one of these three communions forms the whole Church, but is only a part. If a mirror was broken into three pieces, and the largest of these, having had its edges cut straight, was separately framed, this newly-framed portion would have a unity of its own, but not the unity of the original mirror; it would represent such an unity as is exhibited by the Roman Catholic Church at the present time.

Each of the three portions of the Church possesses, as we have said, the creeds, the order of bishops apostolically consecrated, and, with the bishops, the sacraments or channels of grace, by which members of the Church are united to Christ, the center of unity. Though outwardly separated, the Church is inwardly one, — the body of Christ, indwelt by the Holy Ghost, the Life-Giver. These divisions of which we have been speaking are exceedingly sad; — they are sad, as being contrary to the mind of our blessed Lord, expressed in his 1 Dollinger, The Reunion of the Churches, pp. 133, 134.

great eucharistic intercession the night before He died; — they are sad, as hindering the spread of the gospel, and the conversion of the world to Christ; — they are sad as a ground of per petual reproach.

It is our duty to possess a spirit desirous of re-union, and to keep up such a spirit by earnest prayer, and in all ways of speech and feeling as ever ready for re- union when the path shall be opened to us. The touching words at the conclusion of Dr. Pusey’s third and last Eirenicon are worthy of record, and with them we will bring this sorrowful chapter to a close, —

” But we are children of common fathers, of those who, after having shone with the light of God within them upon earth, and having set on a candlestick which shall never be hid the clear light of their inherited faith, now shine like stars in the kingdom of their Father. Sons of the same fathers, we must in time come to understand each other’s language…. Evil days and trial-times seem to be coming upon the earth. Faith deepens, but unbelief too becomes more thorough. Yet what might not God do to check it, if those who own one Lord and one faith were again at one, and united Christendom should go forth bound in one by love — the full flow of GOD’S Holy Spirit unhemmed by any of those breaks, or jars, or manglings — to win all to his love whom we all desire to love, to serve, to obey. To have removed one stumbling-block would be worth the labor of a life. But He alone, the author of peace and the lover of concord, can turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the

children to the fathers. ‘ O Lord, in the midst of the years revive thy work; in the midst of the years make known: in wrath remember mercy.’ ” x

PRAYER FOR UNITY.

OLORD Jesus Christ, who saidst unto thine apostles, Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you; regard not our sins, but the faith of thy Church; and grant her that peace and unity which is agreeable to thy will, who livest and reignest with the Father and the Holy Ghost, one God, world without end. Amen.

* Page 342.

part Second.

tlbe Cburcb in )6n0lanb.

OUR LORD WITH ST. AUGUSTINE AND ST. AIDAN.

This illustration is a reproduction of the seal of the Church House, thus described by Archbishop Benson: — “The figure of our Lord, taken from one of the most beautiful pictures of Fra Angelico, stands with parted arms upon a rock. From the rock now out four streams of Paradise into the ocean of the great world. Below him, still on his own rock, stand two great spiritual forefathers of England, St. Aidan, in his Celtic dress, and St. Augustine.” The design “thus com memorates Christ’s two apostles, sent to our race amid the great world with the blessing of his outspread hands.”

Chapter VII. The Conversion of England

THERE is perhaps no subject of greater interest to an English Churchman, than that which is raised by the question, — How did the Church of God come to this land? Various answers have been given. Some have thought that St. Paul, in his journeyings to the West, preached the gospel here: others, that Joseph of Arimathea, who buried our Lord, was the first missionary: others again, that a British king named Lucius begged Eleutherus, a bishop of Rome, to send Christian teachers to this land. But there is no sufficient evidence for any of these tales, and they are rejected by historians as unreliable.

The most probable reply to our question is thus given by the late Dr. Bright, — ” We cannot reasonably doubt that some Christians did pass over from Gaul (the early name of France) to our shores during the Second century if not earlier, and planted here and there some settlements of the Church.” “

At the opening of the fourth century, we are met with the great story of the martyrdom of St. Alban, a Roman soldier, who was beheaded for the faith of Christ at Verulam, now known as St. Albans, in Hertfordshire. It is a matter of history that in the year 314, three British bishops were present at the Council held at Aries, a city of Gaul; and that again, in the year 359, the presence of three British bishops is noted at the Council of Ariminum in Umbria, on the Adriatic.

Up to this time the historical notices of the Church in this land are brief and scanty. But we know enough to be assured that the Church of Christ was settled here early in the fourth century, with bishops in direct line from the apostles, and the divine sacraments, and the true faith.

The fact of British bishops being present at the Councils just named, affords undoubted evidence that the British Church was recog nized as a true and living branch of the One, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ.

Some time after this a terrible desolation fell upon this land, and on the Church of this country, though out of it, through much suffering, a greater life was about to arise. It happened in this manner. Roman troops for some years had occupied Britain. On their departure in the fifth century, the Britons left to themselves were unable to cope with the wild tribes of the North, and to protect them selves they invited over from Germany the

Saxons, a heathen tribe. The Saxons came, and saved the Britons from their foes. But after a while the Saxons coveted this fair land, and determined to expel those whom they bad come to assist, massacring them, or driving them out. The Britons found safety only in the mountainous regions of Wales, and the distant moorlands of Cornwall. With the ex pulsion of the Britons, every vestige of the Church settlements outside these regions perished. ” Wherever the invaders came, sweeping on like a vast destroying force, the Church’s orderly system fell before them; the worship of Woden and Thor drove out the worship of Christ.” * It was as though a sponge had passed over the country, and the night of heathenism again set in.

The Saxons, coming over from Germany in increasing numbers, took possession of the whole land, which was afterwards called by the name of England. The British Church made no attempt to convert the conquerors, and they continued in their heathenism for many years.

At last came the first movement for the conversion of the Saxons, and that too from a singular cause. By some means or other a number of Saxon boys from Britain were taken to Rome to be sold as slaves. Standing in the slave-market, their fair faces and golden hair attracted the notice of a priest (or deacon) named Gregory, who made enquiries concern ing their nation and religion. We give the story in the words of Dr. Bright, — ” Passing through the Roman market, Gregory saw some

1 Bright, Waymarks in Church History % p. 300.

boys exposed for sale…. Let us try to picture him, with his ruddy face, scanty darkish hair, kindly look, and beautiful hands, as he stands still, attracted by the sad sight of those helpless lads, whose white skin and golden hair were proof enough of their Northern parentage, and were associated with a beauty of face which their unhappy condition would make all the more touching. He who, in after years, used to take pains with the teaching of his young choristers, was moved to the very soul with pity for the slave boys: he asked from what country they came. The slave-owner — probably a Jew — answered, * From Britain: the people there have these fair complexions.’ Then came the question, as from Gregory’s full heart, * Are they heathens or Christians? ‘ ‘ Heathens/ He sighed, as a servant of Christ might well sigh: * Alas! that such bright faces should be in the power of the prince of darkness— that with outward forms so lovely, the mind within should be sick and empty of grace! How do you call their nation? ‘ ‘ Angles.’ Then, with that fondness for playing on the sound of a name, with a serious thought under the play fulness, Gregory replied, ‘ ‘Tis well — they have Angels’ faces; it were meet they should be fellow-heirs with Angels in heaven. What is. their native province? ‘ ‘ Deira ‘; we might translate, Yorkshire, — for the Southern of the two Northumbrian realms may for practical purposes be identified with the land between the Tees and Humber: and Gregory’s ear, catching its name, suggested the comment, ‘They must be rescued de ira Dei (i.e., from the wrath of God).’ One more question: ‘ Who

was their king? ‘ ‘ Aella.’ ‘ Alleluia, praise to God the Maker ought to be sung in those parts.’ He passed on, and saw the boys no more.” x

Soon after, when Gregory became bishop of Rome, he sent out a band of some forty monks with a priest named Augustine at their head, as missionaries to convert the Saxons. This was in the year 597. They landed in Kent; and Ethelbert the king of that part of England, whose wife, a daughter of the king of Paris, was already a Christian, gave them permission to settle in the Isle of Thanet. From thence they removed to Canterbury, which now became the head-quarters of the Roman missionaries. The king was baptized, and, as was usually the case, the tribe followed his lead. In this way, a considerable part of the south-east of the island, then known as the kingdom of Kent, was converted to Chris tianity.

Augustine was anxious that the British Christians, who had taken refuge in Wales and Cornwall, should place themselves under his authority. Two meetings were arranged between them and Augustine, the first at a place named Augustine’s Oak, thought to be situated south of the river Severn, the Second at Bangor situated in Wales. At the latter of these meetings seven British bishops were present. Augustine asked them to join with him in preaching to the Saxons, and to give up certain customs in which they differed from the Roman uses. They refused both requests, and also to accept him as their archbishop.

The division continued until the close of the thirteenth century, when the British Church was finally absorbed in the province of Canter bury.1

While rightly grateful to Rome for thus taking the lead in the conversion of England, we must not forget that there are other sources of our English Christianity, possessing a more extensive influence. The Roman mission was successful as regards the kingdom of Kent, enlarging its influence as far as London, and partly into Essex, but it advanced no further. A Roman missionary indeed, Paulinus, was sent to the North as chaplain to the bride of Edwin the king of Northumbria, a daughter of Ethelbert. For a while he succeeded in making converts. But when Edwin was slain in battle, and there was a great slaughter of

1 “We may confidently say with the late Professor Freeman, ‘ It is contrary to all historical fact to speak of the ancient British Church as something… out of which the Church of England grew.’ It is equally unhistorical to speak of the Welsh episcopate as the ‘ fountain ‘ of the English. There is, we may say it with thankfulness, a real continuity between the British and the English Church; but it consists in this, that by slow degrees — first by the Britons’ acceptance of the Roman Easter, then by the establishment of precedents in favor of the consecration of Welsh bishops at Canterbury, then by the assertion of jurisdiction by Canterbury over Wales, and lastly by the exercise of visitatorial power by Canterbury in Wales — by a complex process which extended through some five centuries, the English Church absorbed ths British into its one body; the older and smaller stream flowed into the younger and larger, and became a veritable and inseparable part of it.’* Bright, Waymarks in Church History, pn. 298, 299.

his people, Paulinus fled, the Church he had founded was well-nigh destroyed, and Northumbria sank back practically into heathenism.

It was then that Oswald, who succeeded Edwin and recovered the lost kingdom of Northumbria, resolved to restore Christianity. For this purpose he sought a bishop of the Church of God. On the western coast of Scot land lies a small island named lona,1 upon which a powerful body of Christian monks from Ireland had settled. These men were members of whatsis known as the Celtic Church. From lona in the year 635, a holy bishop named Aidan came forth on his eventful mission. Bishop Lightfoot thus tells the deeply interest ing story of his being sent. ” Aidan was not the first choice of his spiritual superiors for this arduous work. The first missionary sent out from lona had failed…. He returned speedily to lona disheartened, reporting that these Northumbrians were a stubborn and im practicable people, with whom nothing could be done. Aidan was present at this conference. He broke in, ‘ Brother, it seems to me that thou hast been unduly hard upon these untaught hearers, and hast not given them first according to the apostle’s precept the milk of less solid doctrine, until gradually nurtured on the word of God they should have strength enough to digest the more perfect lessons.’ All eyes were turned upon the speaker. Here was the very man whom the work demanded. The humility, the patience, the gentle sym pathy, the wise discretion, the whole character

1 lona, is a modern corruption of the name Hy, or Icolmkill: the island lies off the coast of Argyleshire.

of the man flashes out in this simple, eager utterance.” x

Aidan came forth from lona, and made his head-quarters at Lindisfarne, a little island which, at low water, may be approached from the coast of Northumberland. Here, Aidan received fellow-workers from lona, and further gathered round him twelve English boys, whom he trained to become missionaries to their heathen countrymen. It is an interesting fact that four of these boys in later years became bishops. Under Aidan and his fellows^ Chris tianity was restored to the North. It is well to remember that Aidan neither sought nor received sanction from Rome or Canterbury, but was sent at the request of King Oswald by the Celtic Church, as missionary bishop of the North.

In comparing the work of Augustine and Aidan, Bishop Lightfoot says, — ” It was in the year 635 — just thirty years after the death of Augustine — that Aidan commenced his work. Though nearly forty years had elapsed since Augustine’s first landing in England, Chris tianity was still confined to its first conquest, the south-east corner of the island, the kingdom of Kent. Beyond this border, though ground had been broken here and there, no territory had been permanently acquired for the Gospel.2 Then commenced those thirty years of earnest energetic labor, carried on by these Celtic mis sionaries and their disciples from Lindisfarne as

1 Leaders in the Northern Church, St. Aidan, pp. 43, 44. Bishop Lightfoot gives a shortened account of the story as found in Bede’s Ecclesiastical History, Book iii. chap. 5.

” East Anglia had been partly converted in the first instance by the Roman missionary Paulinus.

their spiritual citadel, which ended in the submis sion of England to the gentle yoke of Christ.” ‘

A distinguished writer of the Roman Church, in describing the work of the Roman and Celtic missionaries makes a similar admission, in these words, —

” Of the eight kingdoms of the Anglo-Saxon confederation, that of Kent alone was exclu sively won and retained by Roman monks, whose first attempts among the East Saxons and Northumbrians ended in failure. In Wessex and in East Anglia, the Saxons of the West and the Angles of the East were converted by the combined action of continental missionaries and Celtic monks. As to the two Northumbrian kingdoms, and those of Essex and Mercia, which comprehended in themselves more than two-thirds of the territory occupied by the German conquerors, these four countries owed their final conversion exclusively to the peaceful invasion of the Celtic monks,2 who not only rivalled the zeal of the Roman monks, but who, the first obstacles once surmounted, shewed much more perseverance and gained much more success.” 3

Thus far we have dwelt upon the work of Augustine and Aidan, and their disciples. But

1 Leaders in the Northern Church, The Celtic Mission^ p. 9. See Warren, Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church^ p. 14.

a Of the four missionaries first sent to the Midlands from Northumbria, three were Angles, who had however been trained under the Celtic bishop of Lindisfarne.

there are others, of whom we must briefly speak, who shared in the conversion of England.

The year before Aidan came to Northumbria, a portion of England named Wessex received the Christian faith at the hands of a missionary named Birinus. His origin is uncertain, but we know that he went to Rome, and on promising to preach the gospel in parts of England which had not yet been visited by any Christian teachers, the bishop of Rome caused him to be consecrated a missionary bishop. Birinus became the first bishop of Dorchester, and labored with great success in heathen Wessex.

There is yet the name of another founder of the Church in England to which we must refer, that of Felix. Felix came from Burgundy with out any direct communication with Rome. He was consecrated abroad, as Bishop of Dunwich, a town on the coast of Suffolk, now covered by the sea, where for twenty years he labored in the conversion of East Anglia. We have in the town of Felixstowe a survival of his name.

It is upon the foundations laid by these and such like holy men, that the English Church is built. They are our Fathers in Christ, and to them we owe a vast debt of gratitude.

Chapter VIII. The Settlement of the Anglo-Saxon Church

IN the last chapter we referred to the mixed sources of English Christianity. It will be useful now to trace the way in which the various missions of which we have spoken were united to form the English Church, and how the English Church came to accept the authority of the bishop of Rome.

There came at last, as might have been expected, a collision between the Roman and the Celtic missionaries and their disciples. The customs of the two bodies differed in several particulars. The main difference was as to the time of keeping the great Easter festival, — the followers of the Roman mission observing it at one time, those of the Celtic mission at another. The difference naturally caused great confusion. To solve the difficulty, a conference was held at the Abbey of Whitby, under Oswy, the Northumbrian king, Oswald’s successor. This was in the year 664.

By this time the belief had grown that the Church of Rome, which had been founded by

8o The Settlement of the Anglo-Saxon Church.

the two apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, had specially the authority of St. Peter in its favor; and also that St. Peter himself had the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to open and to shut at his will. Arguments were heard on both sides, and the king decided in favor of the Roman use, basing his decision on the idea that Rome represented St. Peter, ” that door-keeper, whom I will not contradict… lest haply when I come to the doors of the kingdom of heaven, there should “be none to unbar them.” x The result of this conference was mainly -due to the influence of Wilfrid, formerly one of the twelve boys whom Aidan had gathered round him at Lindisfarne; who, though brought up by Celtic monks, had become a staunch sup porter of the Roman usages.

This decision involved far more than the question of keeping Easter. It naturally fol lowed that Rome should be looked to as the arbiter in all differences, and the referee in questions which might afterwards arise. It is however to be observed, that, important as the decision at Whitby was, it was but a voluntary act on the part of the English Church acting under royal authority. There was no question of divine right, otherwise there could have been no choice. It is quite impossible that such saintly men as the Celtic missionaries could have been ignorant, as they certainly were, of the Roman claims, if such claims were a matter of divine right. All this is to be borne in mind, for it affects the action of the English Church at the time of the Reformation.

Bishop Lightfoot, in speaking of the decision 1 Bede, Book iii. chapter 25.

at Whitby, says, — ” This was the first rivet of the Roman yoke, which was to press so heavily on England in the generations to come. Yet it would be foolish to ignore the immediate advantages of this submission. The Church of England needed unity before all things. But this was impossible, while there was one Church in the North looking to lona for guidance, and another in the South owing allegiance to Rome. Moreover, the fuller development of the English Church required that it should be drawn into the main stream of Christian civilisation, which at this time flowed through Rome. While we are thankful that the foundations of our North umbrian Church were laid on the simplicity and devotion, the free spirit, the tenderness and love, the apostolic zeal of the missionaries of lona, we need not shrink from acknowledging that she learned much from the more complete organization and the higher culture of which Rome was then the schoolmistress.” *

This same year the yellow fever caused a dreadful mortality throughout England. Many Anglo-Saxon bishops died, and among them the archbishop of Canterbury. By this time the whole land, with the exception of Sussex, had become Christian, and a general desire arose to push forward the work of the Church. The first thing needed was to knit together the scattered missions of the Church, and for this purpose a master-mind was needed. Oswy, king of Northumbria, and Egbert, king of Kent, G

82 The Settlement of the Ang^o -Saxon Church.

as the two most powerful princes, agreed that it would be well to select an Englishman to be archbishop of Canterbury. One of the Kentish clergy was chosen, but having gone to Rome for consecration, died there.

After some delay, the bishop of Rome made choice of a priest of the Eastern Church, named Theodore, who was consecrated at Rome in the year 668. Theodore was a Greek monk, a native of Tarsus, St. Paul’s city. He was a man of years and experience, a scholar, and withal possessed with large sympathy. He arrived in our land on Sunday, May 27, A.D. 669. Shortly after his arrival he was joined by one Hadrian, who had previously been offered the archbishopric, but had declined the offer. Traversing together the whole land, they soon became acquainted with the people and their needs; organizing schools and monasteries as occasion presented itself, and correcting such abuses as then existed. Theodore appears to have won his way everywhere by his tact and sympathy. With the support of the clergy, he began to carry out his great plans for the consolidation of the isolated missions of the Anglo-Saxon Church.

Theodore’s primacy was a very eventful crisis in the history of the. Anglo-Saxon Church. Hitherto made up of scattered missions, under his direction it was knit into an organic whole; the number of bishops was nearly doubled: the land was divided into dioceses, and the foundations of the parochial system, as we have inherited it, were laid.

Chapter IX. The Causes of the Reformation

IN this chapter we propose to trace out further stages by which the English Church became more completely subject to the bishop of Rome; and to tell of the various abuses which crept in, and which led in the end to the Reformation in the sixteenth century.1

From the days of Theodore to the Conquest, there elapsed a period of four hundred years. During this time the power of the Roman see gradually increased, and its influence in the affairs of the English Church grew more and more. But it acquired yet greater strength through the Norman Conquest. William the Conqueror, to establish his position according to the belief of that time, besought the Pope to sanction his expedition, and he entered England with this supposed authority. The Norman

1 In speaking of the Reformation, we should remember that though this great movement began in the i6th century, it was not confined to that period. The Reformation was continued and brought more fully into shape by the Caroline divines in the I7th century, whose spirit the leaders of the Catholic Revival in the iQth century so largely inherited.

kings followed the same course. The climax to this unhappy idea of subjection to Rome was reached in the great conflict, about in vestitures; i.e., as to whether the pope or the king should appoint to bishoprics. In the weak reign of King John, Pope Innocent III. deposed the King, and bestowed the kingdom upon Philip of France, urging him to take possession of England, on the ground that it was part of the pope’s empire. The quarrel had been as to the see of Canterbury. John, to save himself, knelt before the pope’s legate, and owned that he held his crown from the pope, and that England, both in civil and ecclesiastical matters, was subject to the Roman see.

The struggle between the popes and the sovereigns of England continued till a strong king arose, Edward III. (1327-1377) who, backed by bishops and nobles, decreed that “neither John nor any other person could subject the nation to another power without the consent of the nation.” An annual pay ment of one thousand marks known as the ‘CENSUS,’ established by King John as an acknowledgment of the dependence of the king dom on the pope, ceased in consequence of this decree.

It is needless to speak further of the struggle between the popes and the English Government. We will only add that the results varied accord ing to opportunities offered to either side, — the l^jpes striving to gain their own objects, the English Government struggling for its liberties, — the strife turning in favor of one side or the other as the power alternated.

Deep grievances were felt at the heavy exactions pressing on both clergy and laity alike. Of these exactions we will now speak. The popes claimed ‘PETER’S PENCE.’ This was originally a voluntary offering made as far back as the year 787, partly as an alms, and partly for the sustenance of a house for English pilgrims in Rome. With the exception of the reign of Edward III. this tax was paid regularly for a period of 700 years.

In addition to this, the popes claimed a further tax, named ‘ANNATES.’ Annates were the first fruits of vacant bishoprics and other benefices. Before a bishop could be consecrated, it was needful to possess a document called a 1 bull/ The name was given from the Latin ‘ bulla,’ which signified the leaden seal attached to such documents. These * bulls’ were only issued by the pope, and had to be paid for. Besides this, the newly made bishop had to pay in advance the whole of the first year’s income to the Roman court. Among the lower clergy every promotion involved the pay ment of annates.

But more serious than all this, was the pope’s interference with the liberties of the English Church by means of what was named ‘PRO VISIONS.’ By this is meant that the pope provided beforehand a person to fill the next vacancy in any benefice he named. Sometimes this claim was exercised with good effect, but frequently the reverse was the case. By means of ‘provisions,’ the most prominent positions and the best livings in the Church were filled

by foreigners, many of whom resided abroad, and never even visited their parishes, etc., knowing neither the speech nor the face of their flocks, all the time drawing the revenues of such benefices. Of these persons so pro vided for by the popes, Archbishop Trench says, — ” Perhaps, taking all things into account, and above all that many thus appointed were ‘ persons detestable in life and morals ‘ (so one writing in 1311 assures us), this was in most instances the least harmful course they could pursue, and their absence the greatest favor which they could confer…. These ‘provisions ‘ were resented everywhere,… and no wonder. The scale on which foreign ecclesiastics were quartered on the land, the extent to which the patience of Englishmen was tried, may be estimated by the fact that in the year 1240 Pope Gregory IX. sent to the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishops of Lincoln and Salisbury, requiring them to provide for three hundred Romans in the earliest vacant benefices which they had at their disposal, and restraining them from presenting any others until these his nominees had first been provided for.” x

The spiritual care of the people had fallen into a state of decline which is now scarcely conceivable. The condition of things may be understood from the fact, that Cardinal Wolsey, living always at court as Chancellor and Prime

Mr. Aubrey Moore in his lectures and Papers on the History of the Reformation^ speaking of the amount of money drained from the country into the papal coffers, tells us that in the reign of Henry III. the foreign clergy drew 60,000 marks in one year, a sum larger than the revenues of the Crown.

Minister, held at the same time the archbishopric of York, and the three bishoprics of Tournai in Belgium, Lincoln, and Winchester. The state of ignorance among the people became such, that, as Mr. Simmons shews in his notes on The Lay Folks’ Mass Book, as times went on, their part in the services of the Church became less and less, until the Mass became an exclusively clerical service.

In all ecclesiastical suits, the Roman see came to be regarded as the final * COURT OF APPEAL.’ These ecclesiastical suits included all questions or disputes concerning the actions, injury, or property of ecclesiastical persons or corporations; and beyond this, cases touching wills and inheritance. It was no doubt an advantage to be able to carry causes to an independent and disinterested authority in a distant land. By means of such appeals it is easy to see what an enormous power was given to the popes. In the hands of some popes this power was used wisely, and with undoubted impartiality. In other hands, alas! the greed of gold entered in, and a grievous system of bribery prevailed,— bribery so shameless that it is a pain even to refer to it at all.

The late Archbishop Trench speaks very strongly as to the abuses which eventually prevailed in the Roman court. He says, — ” the whole organization (of the curia) seemed little better than a vast and elaborate machinery for the wringing, under every conceivable pre-

text, of the greatest possible amount of money from the faithful, and hardly seeming to exist for any other end…. Time would fail me were I to enumerate all, or nearly all, the devices by which it was sought to fill full the papal exchequer. Marvelous indeed was the ingenuity which some of these displayed. For example, it was claimed, — Clement IV. being the first who advanced this claim, — that all dignities, benefices and the like, which became vacant through the death of the beneficiary while at Rome, should for the next turn be in the pope’s gift. But the matter did not rest here. Again and again the net was stretched wider, and at the same time its meshes woven closer, that it might embrace more and more within its folds. Thus Boniface VIII. extended the claim, so as to include every ecclesiastical office held by persons dying within two days’ journey of the spot where at the time of death the Curia might be. It was a fruitful source of revenue. In the necessity of things there was a constant influx of the higher ecclesiastics to Rome; and these, detained there by in terminable suits or by other causes, were exposed, not to speak of the ordinary chances of mortality, to the deadly Roman fevers, which then as now were ever watching for their prey.”1

What the effect of this traffic in holy things had upon the souls of the people, it is not difficult to conceive. How could the people respect the clergy who had obtained their right to minister the things of God by such utterly unworthy methods?

But there were behind these glaring scandals, to which we have referred, other more serious abuses affecting the spiritual life of the people; of these it is our duty to speak honestly yet sorrowfully.

First, as to what were known as ‘ INDUL GENCES.’ About the year 1510, Pope Leo X. was raising money to build the great church of St. Peter at Rome. To further this object, the sale of indulgences was suggested by some of his advisers, and permitted by the pope himself. At the first, these indulgences related only to Church censures; and it was taught that they could only avail for those who had the proper dispositions of heart. But these limitations were soon overpassed. A corrupt teaching pre vailed that in the intermediate state, or place of waiting between death and judgment, souls were in material flames and undergoing pains which differed little, save in their temporary character, from the sufferings of the lost in eternity. These pains were regarded not only as a means of purification, but also of punish ment. This place of suffering was named purgatory. In 1477, Pope Sixtus IV. declared that indulgences might be obtained which would save such souls from the pain with which they were visited in purgatory.

. It was urged that our Saviour’s merits saved from everlasting death, but that the temporal punishment due to sin had to be borne by sinners, and that this was worked out in purga tory. It was taught moreover that our Saviour’s sufferings and death were more than sufficient

go The Causes of the Reformation.

to pardon sin, and to redeem the world. To the merits of Christ were added those of the saints, of whom it was profanely taught that they had done more good than their own salvation demanded. These merits of Christ and of the saints were regarded as housed in a bank, upon which the pope could draw for the benefit of the living and departed.

Thus the remission of sins in this life, and relief from the punishment of sins in purgatory, came to be regarded as a gift of God which could be purchased with money. It is easy to see how all this made light of the need of repentance for sin, and ” it is not wonderful that earnest preachers of repentance long before Luther should have been filled with the deepest indignation at this murder of souls, — for so they were wont to call it, — should have declared, as one did in memorable words, that Christ is the only Indulgence, and in plainest words have warned the poor deceived people that trusting in those bought with money they were trusting in a lie.” x Dr. Pusey considered that the sale of these indulgences very chiefly caused the Reformation.

Again and again loud voices were raised calling for reform of these terrible evils, and demanding a reformation of the Church in its head and members. But in vain. All desires for reform by means of Councils were alike of no avail. The dread of loss of power, and other motives were too strong, and the papal court turned a deaf ear to all these demands. Instead of setting itself in the front, and taking the lead in a great reform, with a truthful

The Causes of the Reformation. gi

acknowledgment of sins and imperfections, the Roman court made it a chief concern, at the time, to foil the attempts then very earnestly made to effect a wholesome reformation.

Beyond all these abuses to which we have referred, there was another nearer home; and of that we must briefly speak.

In treating of the conversion of England we referred to the part taken in that work by certain monks, as Augustine and Aidan. The word monk signifies ‘one who dwells alone,’ but the term also applies to both priests and laymen who made a home together in religious houses, or monasteries as they were called. The monks bound themselves not to marry, to possess no personal property, and to live a life of obedience to rule. In the middle ages the monks played a most important and valuable part in the affairs of church and nation. The monasteries were the training schools of the clergy, the homes of art and learning, the refuge of the sick and aged. It was the monks who kept the lamp of knowledge bright in dark and dismal times, and to them England owes a large debt. But they had their day, and their glory was destined to pass away.

By degrees a great proportion of the land came into their hands, and also great wealth; the monks fell into idle and luxurious ways, and lost their fame for zeal and holiness.

Of the friars, or ‘ brothers ‘ as the word means, we must also speak. These were men who left the world, and devoted themselves to the service

of the Church; they ” embodied the ideal of the evangelical life, as in those ages conceived, more completely than any of the preceding orders had done. Living upon alms, and thus finding a table everywhere spread for them, they did not require, as the others did, per manent landed endowments before they could found their houses. They basked moreover in the peculiar favor not of the people only but of the popes, who soon recognized in them their most faithful and their most efficient militia.” x

The friars, as also with some exceptions the monks, placed themselves under the patronage and protection of the popes, who freed them from all control of the bishops. This exemption from episcopal control led to laxity of discipline and morals. Moreover the monks and friars made themselves offensive to the parish priests, drawing away people from their lawful shep herds, and creating a kind of schism. This was specially the case with the friars. Of them Archbishop Trench says, — “The monks had not been permitted to celebrate, except within their own walls, the divine offices; and for a long while there had not been more of them ordained than were actually necessary for this. But these, with other privileges, as to baptize, to hear confessions, to administer extreme unction, to bury in their own churches,— this last permission a very mine of wealth, — were all accorded to these favoured friars, who exer cised their intrusive ministrations where they would, with no license obtained from the bishop, no leave granted by the parish priest. They are accused of everywhere seeking to under-

mine the respect of the people for their appointed guides; bidding all come to them, who knew the secrets of spiritual direction, who could discern between leprosy and leprosy; who were not dumb dogs, blind guides, as were others. And multitudes came; being only too glad to confess their sins to the wandering friar whom they never had seen before, whom perhaps they never should see again; so sparing themselves the shame of a confession to their own clergy; not to say that as a rule, if we may believe Chaucer’s word concerning the mendicant absolver, ‘ He was an easy man to give penance.’ The mischief reached such a height that Pope Innocent IV. in 1254, made some feeble efforts to revoke or limit these special privileges which his predecessors had lavished on their new favourites with so prodigal a hand. The orders, however, had grown too strong, and succeeded in retaining all or nearly all which had been once conceded to them.” l The parish clergy were powerless to cope with the monks and friars, who were backed up by the popes. Here again was a state of things which cried aloud for remedy.2 By degrees, and for various reasons of which we have not space to speak here, the religious orders came to be objects of dislike to the people ^ of England. To all these preparations for a religious revolution, must be added the spread

* To show the extent to which the religious orders pre vailed, Mr. Aubrey Moore estimates that 1200 to 1300 monasteries and friaries had been established in England. For in the State returns of ecclesiastical and monastic property, which was made in 153^, the revenue of the monasteries is stated to be about £\ 60,000 per annum.— History of the Reformation, pp. 128. 130.

of learning so greatly aided by the invention of printing in the year 1440. Of the latter, it has been said that it was a ” new gift of tongues, which lent wings to knowledge, and put within the reach of hundreds and presently of thousands, precious lore which had hitherto been within the reach of but two or three.”

The first translation of the New Testament from the original language appeared in 1525, but a few years preceding the Reformation. Men’s eyes were opening to the errors and superstitions of the time, and they began to question the truth of much that they had been taught.

England was fully ripe for a great religious revolution. Popular preachers, Wycliffe being the chief, had been stirring the people against the many abuses of the times. The air was full of inflammable materials, which only awaited some cause sufficiently exciting to set them alight. At last came the spark that set fire to the train so long prepared for the explosion; — in Germany, the sale of Indulgences to which we have referred, by the Dominican friar, Tetzel, — in England, the unrighteous resolve of Henry VIII. to divorce his queen.1

1 While the sale of indulgences was mainly the cause of the Reformation on the Continent, the same cannot be said of the King’s divorce; it was rather the occasion than the cause of the Reformation in England. Roman Catholic controversialists strive to show that the English Reformation stands or falls with the character of Henry viii. and his advisers; but there can be no doubt that a crisis would have been reached in some other way, ‘even if Henry viii. had never existed. The Reformation, when it came, was only the final act of a long struggle.

It was a time when the Roman see, if it were to preserve the unity of the Church, should have put itself at the head of the reforming movement. It did nothing of the kind, but resisted all pressure for the assembling of a Council, until it was too late. The Council of Trent summoned at length by the pope, did not meet, or put forth any decision, until the Reformation in its earliest and strongest movement was over. The decrees of this Council were not published until 1564, in Queen Elizabeth’s reign.

There were no doubt very grievous circum stances connected with the English Reformation, chiefly the arbitrary, cruel, and licentious deal ings of Henry VIII., and the greed of Henry and his nobles in despoiling the religious houses for the sake of their lands and abounding wealth, on which they laid their hands. It has been well said that ‘ the prize they fought for was the goods, and not the good of the Church.’ But no unprejudiced mind can doubt that there were grievous superstitions that needed removal, doctrines which had to be reconciled with the word of God, and Church order which had to be restored both in the episcopal and parochial systems, and freedom to be asserted both in civil and ecclesiastical matters. The authority of the bishops had been lowered by the extra vagant claims of the Roman see, the bishops being regarded as so many curates of the pope. The great part of our contention is the truth that the authority of our bishops is derived directly from Christ himself, and is independent of the papacy.

The appeal made by our divines during the Reformation period, was to a General Council

of the universal Church freely assembled, as against a Council meeting in Italy under the immediate influence of the Roman see.

This same appeal we have inherited; but alas! the response to the appeal seems to be more and more distant, since the doctrine of the infallibility of the pope, and the refusal of the Roman Church to admit the validity of our ordinations,1 have extinguished for the present the prospect of the calling together of a General Council, or the establishment of such intercourse between the English and Roman Churches as might conduce to mutual understanding.

Chapter X. The Results of the Reformation

\

WE are free now to learn more about the Reformation, and its effects upon the Church and religion of this land. The word reformation signifies * the shaping again,’ i.e., the putting something into shape which was out of shape. Reformation is not the destruction of an old thing, and the making of a new thing to take its place; but the improving of the old, so that it still lives on under restored conditions. Thus reformation is much the same as restora tion. It is most important to notice that the Reformation did not change the ancient Church of England for a new Church, neither did it change the old religion for a new religion. But what it did was this, — it freed the old Church from certain grave abuses, and purified the old religion from many harmful superstitions, which, in the middle ages, had attached themselves to the Church. To some of these we have already referred in the last chapter. But there was no point where it could be said, ‘ here the old ends, and the new begins.’

It is only fair to admit that things went much too far in more than one direction; as for

example, — the rejection of erroneous teaching as to the state of the dead, led to an imperfect belief in the value of prayers for the departed; or where exaggerated teaching concerning the Eucharistic sacrifice resulted in an imperfect recognition of this great truth; or again, where the usurpation of the pope was succeeded by the tyranny of the king. These were, in some degree, the natural results of a great reaction. And it is only right to say, that while the great essentials of Christian faith and practice were by God’s good providence preserved, there were grievous losses in less important matters, which it is our duty to strive to repair as being part of our Catholic heritage.

The changes made in the reign of Henry VIII. have been described as nothing more or less than a revolution under the form of law. The first steps were taken in a constitutional manner. In 1530, an Act of Parliament was passed which forbade application to Rome for relief from certain English laws. These dis pensations, as they were called, had caused great vexation to the Church, and the popes had no right to grant them. In 1531, all payments claimed by the Roman see were forbidden to be made any longer. These taxes amounted on an average to about ^3,500 a year, a sum represent ing some ^”14,000 in our money of to-day. In I533» a third act was passed forbidding any appeal to Rome from the English courts. In the next year, Convocation, the parliament of the Church, unduly influenced by dread of the king, decided that the popes had no more right given them by God over the kingdom than any

The Results of the Reformation. gg

other foreign bishop.1 While regretting the manner in which it was brought about, it will be seen nevertheless that these acts were simply a reclaiming of the ancient indepen dence of the English State, and the English Church.

Six years later, in 1539, the Holy Bible in English was circulated, and a few years after the services of the Church were read in our own language. The chalice in the Holy Communion was restored to the laity, who were now allowed to seek absolution after confession as their con sciences directed, and not of compulsion as hitherto. Much superstition concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Communion of Saints was removed. The appeal all through the Reformation time was to the Holy Scrip tures, as interpreted by the teaching of the primitive Church and the fathers, and to the decisions of the General Councils of the Church. This appeal is ours to-day.

The reader must be careful to notice that no official steps were taken to sever the connection of the English Church with that of Rome, although the nation willed to have it so, and the action of Convocation favoured it. When the actual separation with Rome came, as it did in Elizabeth’s time, the Roman court struck the final blow and caused the schism, the Pope

1 ” No amount of charitable activity on the part of a pope in the sixth century could bar a Church which had profited by it from shaking off in the sixteenth a dominating papal yoke which neither Scripture nor antiquity could uphold. Nor could it dispense a Church thus founded from the duty of reviewing questionable traditions, and going back to those primitive standards which are of paramount obligation, “-r Bright, Waymarks in &?rch History, p. 322.

loo The Results of the Reformation.

excommunicating the Queen, and absolving her subjects from their allegiance.

The primacy in honor and precedence allowed to the bishops of Rome in the early Councils, was in no way denied at the Reforma tion; and it is not denied by the English Church now, for she acknowledges General Councils which owned it. But this primacy must be dis tinguished from that lordship and vexatious interference which, in the middle ages, the popes claimed and exercised in England. No steps of any kind were taken to sever the English Church from those foreign Churches in communion with the pope. Members of these Churches are allowed to hold benefices in the English Church without re-ordination.

The apostolic succession was continued with out break, bishops being consecrated all through Reformation times by bishops of the old apostolic line. The sacraments, deriving their security and value from the apostolic succession, were continued. The appeal to antiquity, as the test of truth, was clearer than before. Thus the English Church, by God’s mercy, issued from the Reformation a true and living branch of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Christ. In the words of Mr. Aubrey Moore,-^ ” The continuity of the English Church was the first principle of the English Reformation, and the apostolical succession, so carefully preserved through all changes, was the answer to the charge of schism, as the retention of the three Creeds and the recognition of the four Councils was the answer to the charge of heresy.” x These are matters of such great importance, that we

will proceed to treat them more fully in the following chapters.

“I make not the least doubt in the world, but that tkc Church of England before the Reformation and the Church of England after the Reformation are as much the same Church, as a garden, before it is weeded and after it is weeded, is the same garden; or as a vine, before it be pruned and after it is pruned and freed from luxuriant branches, is one and the same vine.” — Archbishop Bramhall’s Works, i. 2.

” The Church of England hath not changed one thing of what she held before (the Reformation), any way pertaining either to the being or well-being of a Church. She still re tains the same common rule of faith. She still teacheth the necessity of a holy life, and presseth good works as much as before. She still observes all the fundamental ordinances and institutions of Christianity. She baptizeth, she feeds with the Holy Eucharist, she confirmeth. She retaineth the same apostolical government of bishops, priests, and deacons.” — Bishop Bull’s Vindication of the Church of England, xxvi.

Chapter XI. Anglican Orders

THE claim of any body of Christians to be a portion of the Catholic Church, stands or falls by the Apostolic succession. Apart from this succession there is no reliable ministry of the Word and the Sacraments.1 The possession of a ministry in direct line with the apostles, and the maintenance of the Catholic Faith, makes the difference between the Church and a sect. Thus the question of the validity of our orders, i.e., whether the clergy of the English Church are rightly ordained, is one of vital importance. Valid consecration is the corner-stone of the whole ecclesiastical edifice.

As an historical fact, the apostolic succession was continued without break in the English Church all through the Reformation times, by bishops of the old apostolic line. As this state ment has been disputed, it is necessary to produce proofs of its truth.

1 ” The principle of apostolic succession is that no man in the Church can validly exercise any ministry, except such as he has received from a source running back ultimately to the apostles, so that any ministry which a person takes upon himself to exercise, which is not covered by an apostolically received commission, is invalid.” — Gore, The Mission oftht Church, p. 31.

On the death of Edward VI., Mary succeeded to the throne, and under her the breach with Rome was, for a time, healed. The pope sent over Cardinal Pole as legate to reconcile the Church and nation to the Roman see. Mary died November 17th, 1558, and her death was followed within a few hours by that of Pole, who had been consecrated archbishop of Canterbury in 1556. Thus the throne and the archbishopric of Canterbury were vacant at the same time. Elizabeth succeeded to the crown, and at once commenced to restore the reformed religion. Her first care was to fill the vacant arch bishopric. Her choice fell upon Matthew Parker, a man who appeared likely to maintain the liberties of the English Church against Roman interference, and sound doctrine against the heretical teaching of the foreign reformers.

After the needful preliminaries, Parker was consecrated archbishop of Canterbury in the chapel of Lambeth Palace on December 17, X559> by Barlow, sometime bishop of Bath and Wells, then elect of Chichester; Scory, some time bishop of Chichester, then elect of Hereford; Hodgkins, suffragan bishop of Bedford; Coverdale, sometime bishop of Exeter.1 The Lambeth register gives a long and minute account of this great event.

Broadly speaking, the consecration of arch bishop Parker2 was the connecting link by

x Of these Barlow and Hodgkins had been consecrated with the old Pontifical, while Scory and Coverdale had been consecrated with the English Ordinal.

* Even if there were any doubt as to archbishop Parker’s consecration, the apostolic succession would have been re-

which the apostolic succession in the English Church was continued after the final breach with Rome. Objections have been, until re cently, urged as to the validity of his consecration, which are met thus:

(i) It was not till many years after archbishop Parker’s consecration that the fact was ques tioned. A miserable charge known as the ‘ Nag’s Head fable ‘ was trumped up to disprove the consecration. ” In 1604, i.e. forty-five years after Parker’s consecration, an exiled Anglo- Romanist priest of the name of Holywood, in a contro versial book printed at Antwerp, alleged that Parker and some of the other bishops were consecrated (so to call it) by a mock ceremony, all together at one time on a day unspecified at the Nag’s Head tavern, by Dr. Scory (who had been really consecrated bishop in 1551), who was himself in turn consecrated in the like mock way by them. To this story other subsequent writers of the same stamp and class added a specification of three or four names of the other bishops, and finally of fifteen in all…. During the twenty years following 1604, every AngloRomanist writer, with scarcely a single exception, and with suicidal eagerness, repeats the story exultingly, although in varying and contradictory forms.” f The fact of Parker’s consecration is now placed beyond all doubt, and the Nag’s Head fable, which bears upon its face the mark

covered in the next century in the consecration of archbishop Laud, in whom the three lines of the Italian, Irish, and English successions met. See The Pries?: Prayer B<ntk% Anglican Orders, 5th Ed. p. 204.

1 Haddan, Apostolic Succession in the Church of England* p. 1 80.

of falsehood, is given up by all respectable con troversialists. Educated Roman Catholics are now heartily ashamed of this baseless invention.1

As so often happens, God brings good out of evil; and this is true in the case of this unfortunate story, for there is hardly any fact of history which has been more carefully looked into than the consecration of archbishop Parker. As the result of a most searching examination, the record and evidences of the event have been made public in all their fulness.2

(2) The chief consecrator of archbishop Parker was Barlow. It has been questioned whether Barlow was really a bishop himself.

Before answering this objection, it is well to state, that, though the chief, he was not the sole consecrator of Parker. Barlow was assisted, as has been said, by three other bishops, who along with him laid their hands on Parker’s head, each of the four bishops repeating the words of consecration. We quote from the record of Parker’s consecration, — ” After certain prayers and suffrages to God,… the bishops of Chichester and Hereford, the suffragan bishop of Bedford, and Miles Coverdale, laying their hands upon the archbishop, say in English, — ‘Take the Holy Ghost,’ thereby following the ancient use enjoined in the Exeter Pontifical.”

The three bishops were present not only as witnesses, but as consecrators. Martene, a Roman Catholic of great repute as an authority

‘* See Appendix, Apostolical Succession; also Courayer, The Validity of the Ordinations of the English, 1844. pp, 328, etc.

on ritual, says, — “All the bishops who are present are not only witnesses but also cooperators, this is to be asserted beyond all manner of doubt.”1 Thus, even if it were true that Barlow was not consecrated, the defect would have been made good by the bishops who assisted him. The objection to Barlow’s authority rests on the fact that the record of his consecration is missing in the register at Lambeth. But this omission need cause no uneasiness, for, at the period of which we are speaking, there is evidence that the Lambeth registers were most carelessly kept. During the archiepiscopate of Cranmer, in whose time Barlow would be consecrated, out of a total of forty-five consecrations, eight other consecra tions are also omitted, besides five omissions out of eleven translations from see to see. In the case of Pole, the previous archbishop in(Mary’s reign, three of his seven consecrators have no records.

But though the particular record is wanting, there is ample evidence that Barlow was con secrated; the various steps of his advancement to the episcopate are clearly traceable, and good evidence exists that he acted and was treated as a bishop. As Dr. Lingard, a Roman Catholic writer, observes, — ” For ten years Barlow per formed all the sacred duties, and exercised all the civil rights of a consecrated bishop; he took his seat in Parliament as Lord Bishop of St. David’s. He ordained priests: he was one of the officiating bishops at the consecration of Bulkley.” a

1 de Antiquis Ritibus, i. 8. 10. 16. a Catholic Magazine, 1834.

It is worthy of note that bishop Barlow’s

consecration was never disputed until eighty years after the event.

n.

One of the earliest results of the Reformation was the translation and formation of the Prayer Book in English, and with it, and as part of it,, the services for the ordination of the clergy, — named the Ordinal. This was completed in the year 1550, in Edward VI. ‘s reign. This Edwardine Ordinal, with very slight alteration, has been in use in the English Church from that time to the present, and the Anglican clergy have been ordained with it.

In 1896, Pope Leo XIII. issued a bull m which the Orders of the English Church arecondemned as invalid, on the assumption that the Edwardine Ordinal was defective in form and intention. This supposed defect is alleged as the sole ground of condemnation.

Ordination, as a sacramental rite, has an outward and visible sign of the grace which is given for the office and work of the Christian ministry. The outward sign is the laying on of hands, accompanied by certain words which fix the true spiritual meaning of the act. These words are known as the form. Leo XIII. asserted that the form of the Anglican Ordinal in use from 1550 to 1662 was defective, because no explicit mention was made at the moment of the laying on of hands, of the particular grade of the ministry which was being conferred. But this objection is crushed at once by the fact that the ordination services in question log

(‘The form of ordering of priests/ and ‘The form of consecrating of an archbishop or bishop ‘) are quite distinct, as their titles and contents show. In each service the grade of the ministry which is being conferred is plainly indicated again and again. In the one case the matter in hand is the ordination of a priest, and nothing else: in the other case it is that of the consecra tion of a bishop, and nothing else.

At the last revision of the Ordinal in 1662, the words ‘ for the office and work of a priest,’ and * for the office and work of a bishop ‘ were added, to be used during the laying on of hands, at the ordination of a priest or a bishop, as the case might be. This addition was made, not because it was felt that the form previously used was inadequate, but simply to meet the objections of the Presbyterians, who held that the offices of bishop and presbyter were identical. It was thought advisable to add the words in question to accentuate the distinction which the English Church had ever made between the episcopate and the priesthood.

In the service for consecrating bishops, as it stood between 1550 and 1662, during the laying on of hands, the archbishop was directed to say, ” Take the Holy Ghost, and remember that thou stir up the grace of God, which is in these, by imposition of hands: for God hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and love, and of soberness.” These words are a quotation from St. Paul’s charge to St. Timothy, bishop of Ephesus’,1 and, as was generally believed by the commentators and theologians of the sixteenth century, definitely refer to the episcopate, to 1 2 Tim. i. 6, 7.

no Anglican Orders.

which he was consecrated by St. Paul. It is carefully to be noted that the corresponding form in the Roman Pontifical is quite vague and undeterminate: the consecrating bishops, when they lay their hands upon- the bishopelect, simply say, ” Receive the Holy Ghost “: nothing further is added, the purpose being fixed by the context only. Thus, in condemn ing the Orders of the English Church on such grounds, Leo XIII. equally condemned those of the Roman Church.

Leo XIII. further urged that in the Anglican Ordinal there is no intention to consecrate bishops, or to ordain priests, in the Catholic sense. He rashly asserted that the framers of the Edwardine Ordinal deliberately removed from the service of ordination whatever sets forth the dignity and office of the priesthood. This objection refers to the omission from the Anglican rite of the charge ” Receive authority to offer sacrifices to God, and to celebrate masses as well for the quick as the dead,” accompanied by the delivery of the chalice and paten to the newly ordained priest. In place of this charge, which was only added to the Roman Ordinal about the eleventh century, the Anglican service has, ” Take thou authority to preach the Word of God, and to minister the holy Sacraments.” This change was made advisedly, and for good reasons. In defense of the action of the framers of the Anglican rite in making the change, it may be said: First, that the consecrating and offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice, though a most important function of the Christian priesthood, is yet only one of the duties of a priest. The dutv of offering the Eucharistic sacrifice in

had been so greatly exaggerated in the middle ages, as to overshadow the further offices of a priest in baptizing, absolving, preaching, teaching, and blessing. It was the common idea of the time that a priest was ordained for the sole purpose of saying mass, regardless of other pastoral duties. In giving authority to minister the Word of God and his holy Sacra ments, the reformers deliberately restored the lost balance. The Word and the Sacraments comprise the whole treasure of the Church, as the sphere of grace and truth. In ordaining men to be ” faithful dispensers of the Word of God, and of his holy Sacraments,” x the Church commits her whole treasure to their stewardship. In “ministering the Sacraments as the Lord hath commanded,”2 a priest necessarily con secrates and offers the Eucharist. Secondly, it must be remembered that the framers of the English Ordinal were face to face with grave errors concerning the relation of the Eucharist to the Sacrifice of the Cross. These errors* were current even among learned divines of the time, and more common still among the people. It cannot be doubted that popular misconceptions of the true doctrine of the Eucharist, both as regards the real presence and the sacrifice, had their weight with the reformers in making the change we are dis cussing. In this case, the English Church only reverted to an earlier type of ordination service, such, for example, as is found in the primitive Roman service for the ordination of a priest

» See pp. 268, ff.: also the author’s Expositions “f Catholic Doctrine, pp. 163, ff.

Iia Anglican Orders.

in the Sacramentary of St. Leo the Great. In that service there is no allusion to the offering of the Eucharistic sacrifice. Thirdly, it is on no account to be supposed that, in thus hesitating to permit sacrificial terms to remain in the Ordinal, there was any intention of denying the truth of the Eucharistic sacrifice. Archbishop Cranmer, the chief framer of the English Ordinal, writing in 1551, expressly declared that he never intended to deny that the Holy Eucharist is a sacrifice.1 As Dr. Pusey pointed out, “the doctrine of a commemorative sacrifice in the Holy Eucharist has been maintained by a cur rent of our divines ever since the Reformation.”3 The intention in ministering the sacraments is the intention manifested externally. When any one seriously uses the due form and matter requisite for effecting or conferring a sacrament, he is considered by the very fact to do what the Church does. And it cannot be doubted that the reforming bishops, in ordination, seriously intended to do all that our Lord proposed, and the apostles authorized, as the Church has ever done. The intention of the English Church in the matter of ordination is clearly and fully set forth in the preface to the Edwardine Ordinal. In this preface it is stated that ” it is evident to all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient authors, that from the apostles’ time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ’s Church: bishops, priests, and deacons.” The preface goes on to say that it was the

• Letter to the Bishop of London, p. 30. See also the catena of authorities given by Dr. Pusey in The Tracts for Jht Times No. 81.

intention of the framers of the Ordinal that these orders should be ” continued, and reverently used and esteemed, in the Church of England.” It would be impossible to find words which more clearly express the deliberate intention of the English Church to continue the three orders of the Christian ministry as they had existed from the apostles’ times, and as they had been perpetuated all through the long period which intervened between the first century and the sixteenth.

in.

There remains a further objection which is- to be met, which we give and answer in the words of Canon Carter, — “There are Roman Catholics, who, allowing our orders, yet demur to our pos sessing jurisdiction — that is to say, the power of exercising the spiritual gifts conveyed by holy orders, — the reason given being that, as they suppose, jurisdiction is conveyed only through the papal see. Jurisdiction is sometimes re garded as a gift or power superadded to the gift of orders. But it is really nothing more than the apportioning the limits within which this gift may be exercised. It is mapping out the different fields of labor in which a bishop or a priest is free to do his proper work, so long as he is true to Catholic faith and practice. To say that our bishops and priests have no juris diction, is simply to claim that the pope has the right and power to fix for English bishops and priests their spheres of labor. Bishops and priests have, in themselves, as a consequence of order, their full inherent powers. All that is needed is to say where they are free to exercise

them…. All bishops are the successors of the apostles, and, as a ‘ co-equal power,’ to use St. Cyprian’s language, was given to all the apostles alike, so to all bishops alike are full powers given. Such powers were involved in our Lord’s commission, and cannot be separated from it; so necessarily they pass, whole and undivided, to their successors, the Catholic epis copate…. It is surely ridiculous to say, that English bishops, who trace down from the first settlement of Christianity in England, still pos sessing the original sees, though under new arrangements, cannot give to English priests their place of work! ” x

The idea that all jurisdiction proceeds from the pope was unheard of until the twelfth century.2

We will close this chapter by quoting the weighty words spoken by one of the greatest Catholic theologians and historians of the last century. At the Reunion Conference held at Bonn in 1874, Dr. Dollinger, speaking of Anglican Orders, said, — “The solution of the question depends solely on an examination of historical evidence, and I must give it as the result of my investigations, that I have no manner of doubt as to the validity of the episcopal succession in the English Church.”3

* ” That very late monition, that bishops receive their jurisdiction from the pope ought to be banished from Christian Schools, as unheard of for twelve centuries.” — Bossuet, quoted by Pusey, Eirenicon, i. p. 271, note.

* Report of the proceedings of The Reunion Conference at Bonn in 1874, pp. 50, 51.

Chapter XII. The Apostolical Succession in the See of Canterbury

THE APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION

IN THE

SEE OF CANTERBURY.

THE following list contains the names of the archbishops of Canterbury from the conversion of the Saxons to Christianity in the year 597, to the present time. During this period of thirteen hundred years, there have been ninety-three occupants of the chair of St. Augustine, the first archbishop.

1. Augustine. 21. Wulfhelm.

2. Lawrence. 22. Odo.

3. Mellitus. 23. Dunstan.

4. Justus. 24. Ethelgar.

5. Honorius. 25. Siricius.

6. Deusdedit. 26. Elfric.

7. Theodore. 27. Elphege.

8. Brightwald. 28. Liring.

9. Tatwine. 29. Ethelnoth.

10. Nothelm. 30. Eadsige.

11. Cuthbert. 31. Robert of Jumieges.

12. Bregwin. 32. Stigand.

13. Lambert. 33. Lanfranc.

14. Ethelard. 34. Anselm.

15. Wulfred. 35. Ralph of Escures.

1 6. Theogild. 36. William of Corboil.

17. Ceolnoth. 37. Theobald.

1 8. Ethelred. 38. Thomas a Becket.

19. Phlegmund. 39. Richard.

20. Atbelm. 40. Baldwin.

Li6 The Apostolical Succession,

Hubert.

Grindall.

Langton.

Whitgift.

Grant.

Bancroft.

Rich.

Abbot.

Boniface of Savoy.

Laud.

Kilwardby.

Juxon.

Peckham.

Sheldon.

Winchelsey.

Sancroft.

Reynolds.

Tillotson.

Mepeham.

Tenison.

Si-

Stratford.

Wake.

5*-

Bradwardine.

Potter.

Islip.

Herring.

Langham.

Hutton.

Whittlesey.

Seeker.

Sudbury.

Cornwallis.

Courtney.

Moore.

Arundel.

Sutton.

Chicheley.

Howley.

Stafford.

oo.

Sumner.

Kemp.

Longley.

Bourchier.

Tait. ‘

Morton.

Benson.

Dean.

Temple.

Warham.

Davidson.

Cranmer.

Pole.

Parker.

” At.the arrival of Augustine the monk, about six hundred years after Christ, the Britons he found observers still of the self-same government by bishops over the rest of the clergy; under this form Christianity took root again, where it had been exiled. Under the self-same form it remained till the days of the Norman conqueror. By him and his successors it hath from that time till now been upheld.” — Hooker, Reel. Polity, vii. 2. i.

ST. AUGUSTINE’S CHAIR IN CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL.

In this chair ” for many generations the primates of England have all been enthroned; and which, though probably of a later date may yet be rightly called ‘ St. Augustine’s Chair; ‘ for though not the very one in which he sate, it no doubt represents the ancient episcopal throne in which, after the fashion of the bishops of that time, he sate behind the altar (for that was its proper place, and there, as is well known, it once stood), with all his clergy round him, as may still be seen in several ancient churches abroad.”

Stanley, Memorials of Canterbury, 1855, p. 22.

ANGLICAN BISHOP IN COPE AND MITRE.

Chapter XIII. The Bishops of the Anglican Church

IN COMMUNION WITH

THE SEE OF CANTERBURY

” The English Church with its Scotch sister, and American daughter, the latter outnumbering in its episcopate the mother, and the Colonial Churches in all parts of the world, increasing in a ratio to which past ecclesiastical history affords no parallel….” — Neale’sZ*V”r<^/0/(?gj/,p.284.

BISHOPS OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Province of Canterbury.

S.

The Archbishop of

Canterbury. The Bishops of— London. Winchester. Bangor. Bath & Wells. Birmingham. Bristol. Chelmsford. Chichester. Ely. Exeter. Gloucester. Hereford. Lichfield.

The Suffragan Bishops of- 36. Dover. Grantham. Guildford.

24. St. Edmundsbury and

Ipswich.

Province of York.

1. The Archbishop of York. The Suffragan Bishops of—

The Bishops of — 12. Barrow-in-Furness.

2. Durham. 13. Beverley.

3. Carlisle. 14- Burnley.

4. Chester. 15. Hull.

5. Liverpool. 16. Jarrow.

6. Manchester. 17. Knaresborough.

7. Newcastle. 18. Richmond.

8. Ripon. 19- Whalley.

10. Sodor and Man.

BISHOPS OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. The Primus succeeds by election.

1. Aberdeen. 5. Glasgow.

2. Argyll and the Isles. 6. Moray.

3. Brechin. 7. St. Andrews.

BISHOPS OF THE CHURCH OF IRELAND.

Province of Armagh.

1. The Archbishop of

Armagh.

Province of Dublin.

1. The Archbishop of

Dublin.

EUROPE.

(Oversight of British Congregations.)

I. Gibraltar. 2. Northern & Central Europe.

BISHOPS OF THE COLONIAL CHURCHES.

Province of India & Ceylon. 8. Lucknow.

1. Calcutta, Metropolitan. 9. Madras.

2. Assam. 10. Nagpur.

3. Bombay. n. Rangoon.

4. Chota Nagpur. 12. Tinnevelly & Madura.

5. Colombo. 13. Travancore & Cochin.

BISHOPS OF THE COLONIAL CHURCHES (continued.). Church in Japan.

2. Japan, South.

Province of Victoria.

1. Melbourne, Metropolitan* 2. China, North.

3.,, Western.

9. Labuan and Sarawak.

10. Shantung., 12. Victoria (Hong Kong).

NEW ZEALAND.

Province of New Zealand.

The Primate succeeds by election.

AUSTRALIA. Province of New South Wales, 1. Sydney, Metropolitan.

6. Newcastle. 7- Riverina.

Province of Queensland.

1. Brisbane, Metropolitan, Province of Perth.

1. Perth, Metropolitan.

2. Australia, North-West.

AFRICA. Province of South Africa.

1. Capetown, Metropolitan* 5. Kimberley & Kuruman.

9. Rhodesia, Southern.

11. St. John’s (Kaffraria).

2. Africa, West. Equatorial.

AFRICA (continued).

5. Mombasa. 8. Sierra Leone.

6. Nyasaland. 9. Uganda.

7. Rhodesia, Northern. 10. Zanzibar & East Africa.

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA. Province of Canada. Province of ‘Ruperts Land.

1. Fredericton. x- Rupert’sLandjJKte/ro^oHikhJj 2. Montreal. 2. Athabasca.

3. Nova Scotia. 3- Calgary.

4. Quebec. 4- Edmonton.

6. Mackenzie River. Province of Ontario.? Moosonee.

The Metropolitan succeeds $. Qu’Appelle.

by election. 9 Saskatchewan.

1. Algoma. 10. Yukon.

3. Niagara. Province of British Columbia.

4. Ontario. i. Caledonia.

5. Ottawa. 2. Cariboo.

6. Toronto. 3. Columbia.

4. Kootenay. Newfoundland. 5. New Westminster.

WEST INDIES AND SOUTH AMERICA.

Province of the West Indies. The Primate succeeds by election.

r.

.2. 3- Antigua. Barbados. Guiana. Honduras.

5. Jamaica. 6. Nassau. 7. Trinidad.

Argentina. Falkland Islands.

BISHOPS OF THE AMERICAN CHURCH.

The Presiding Bishop succeeds by seniority of consecration.

1. Alabama. 9. Bethlehem.

2. Alaska. 10. California.

3. Albany. 1 1. Central New York.

4. Anking. 12. Chicago.

5. Arizona. 13. Colorado.

•6. Arkansas. 14. Connecticut.

7. Asheville. 15. Cuba.

8. Atlanta. 16. Dallas.

The Bishops of the Anglican Church 123 BISHOPS OF THE AMERICAN CHURCH (continued).

Delaware.

New York.

Duluth.

North Carolina.

East Carolina.

North Dakota:

Eastern Oklahoma.

North Texas.

Eastern Oregon. Easton.

ft Ohio. Oklahoma.

Erie.

Olympia.

Florida.

Oregon.

Fond du Lac.

Panama.

Georgia.

Pennsylvania.

Haiti.

Philippines, The.

Hankow.

Pittsburg.

Harrisburg.

Porto Rico.

Honolulu.

Quincy.

Idaho.

Rhode Island.

Indianapolis.

Sacramento.

Iowa.

Salina.

Kansas.

San Joaquin.

Kentucky.

Shanghai.

Kyoto. %

South Carolina.

Lexington.

South Dakota.

3^.

Liberia.

Southern Brazil.

Long Island.

Southern Florida.

Los Angeles.

Southern Ohio.

Louisiana.

Southern Virginia.

Maine.

Spokane.

Marquette.

Springfield.

Maryland.

Tennessee.

Massachusetts.

Texas.

Mexico.

Tokyo.

Michigan.

Utah.

Michigan City.

Vermont.

Milwaukee.

Virginia.

5°-

Minnesota.

Washington.

Mississippi.

West Texas.

Missouri.

West Virginia.

Montana.

Western Colorado.

Nebraska.

Western Massachusetts.

Nevada.

Western Michigan.

Newark.

Western Missouri.

•57-

New Hampshire.

IOO.

Western Nebraska.

New Jersey.

IOI.

Western New York.

New Mexico.

Wyoming.

Chapter XIV. The Anglican Principle as to the Truth

IT is important that we should have a clear understanding of the principle of the Eng lish Church as to the truth or rule of faith, as that principle was asserted at the Reformation.

Some Protestant sects regard the Bible as the source from which every one may draw his own conclusions as to the truth. What has been held in all ages by the greatest teachers counts for little, if anything, in the way of authority. According to this view, every man becomes his own interpreter of the Bible, which so used may cease to be the word of God, and may become the word of man. The necessary result of such private interpretation of the Scriptures is, that an endless variety of explanations may be given as to the meaning of God’s word. This is one form of error concerning the ascertaining of the truth.

Roman Catholics are bound by the decrees of the Council of Trent. This Council declares that ” the truth is contained in the written

books and in the unwritten traditions, and that it receives and venerates with an equal feeling of piety and reverence all the books of the Old and New Testaments… and also the traditions relating as well to faith as to morals, as having, either from the word of Christ himself or the dictation of the Holy Ghost, been preserved by continuous succession in the Catholic Church.”1 Thus the tendency of the Roman Church is to allow that an article of faith may rest upon Church teaching alone, apart from Scripture basis. The modern Roman Church has also committed itself to a theory of development, which leaves the way open to continual ad ditions to ” the faith once for all delivered unto the saints.”2 This idea of development has gained ground chiefly since the Reformation. During the last century, we have witnessed the addition of two new doctrines to the Catholic creed. We refer to the doctrines of ‘the Im maculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary,’ and the ‘ Infallibility of the Pope,’ belief in which has been made necessary to salva tion, or to communion in the Roman Catholic Church.

If Protestants have relied upon the private interpretation of Scripture at the expense of tradition, Roman Catholics have relied upon tradition at the expense of Scripture.

It is abundantly clear that neither the Protestant nor the modern Roman Catholic principle as to the truth, of which we have spoken, is that of the Church in its earliest days. They are both novelties unknown for centuries, and fraught with great dangers, as experience 1 Sess. iv. a Jude 3, R.v.

and history testify. They are novelties from which, we may thankfully feel, the English Church, its real principle being understood, is delivered.

What then is the principle of the English Church as to the groundwork or rule of faith? What is the Anglican standard in regard to the truth? We reply, — that of the ancient and undivided Church, namely. that, —

THE HOLY SCRIPTURES ARE THE FINAL AU THORITY IN QUESTIONS RELATING TO CATHOLIC TRUTH, THE CHURCH BEING THE INTERPRETER OF THOSE SCRIPTURES, AND THAT TOO IN THE SENSE IN WHICH THE FATHERS HAVE GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD THEM.

This is the groundwork of the celebrated rule of Vincent of Lerins; — “The Canon of Scrip ture is perfect, and most abundantly of itself sufficient for all things.” But ” since the Scripture being of itself so deep and profound, all men do not understand it in one and the same sense, but divers men, diversely, this man and that man, this way and that way, expound and interpret the sayings thereof, so that to one’s thinking, so many men, so many opinions almost may be gathered out of them… for the avoiding of error, the prophets and apostles must be expounded according to the rule of the ecclesiastical and catholic sense.”1

This principle of the primitive Church is stated more simply by Dr. Pusey, — ” What is matter of faith must be capable of being proved out of Holy Scripture; yet that, not according

1 against Heresy, chap. ii.

to the private sense of individuals, but accord ing to the uniform teaching of the Church.”1 Thus Holy Scripture and Catholic tradition are joint and mutually corrective sources of the faith. The faith was delivered to the saints, and given to the Church, before the New Testa ment was written; yet the whole faith so given was, by God’s providence, afterwards contained in Scripture. The Church received her faith before she received her Scriptures, yet the whole of the faith so received can be proved by Scrip ture.2 When the Christian revelation was written down and accepted by the Church, the Church became its interpreter, being constituted by God for this purpose, and being aided by the Holy Spirit in fulfilling it.

It will be seen that the Catholic principle, as we have stated it, is the safeguard against the results of the two erroneous methods of arriving at the truth, stated at the beginning of this chapter.

To this Catholic principle, the English Church committed herself unreservedly at the time of the Reformation: to this principle, our great divines appealed all through Reformation times;

a “Concerning the divine and sacred mysteries of the faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures. Do not then believe me be cause I tell you these things, unless you receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salva tion, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures…. For the present, commit to memory the faith, and expect at the fitting season the proof of each of its parts from the divine Scriptures.”— St. Cyril, Cat. Lect. iv. 5, 17; v. 12.

to this principle, the English Church appeals to-day. In the words of Dr. Pusey ” The Church of England has, from the Reformation, held implicitly, in purpose of heart, all which the ancient Church ever held.”1 That this is the Anglican position, is abundantly evident. Among such evidence, we may quote the canon of Convocation which imposed subscrip tion to the Articles upon the clergy, in Eliza beth’s reign. This canon directs preachers ” to be careful that they never teach ought in a sermon, to be religiously held and believed by the people, except what is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and New Testaments, and what the Catholic fathers and ancient bishops have collected out of the same doctrine.” To gether with Holy Scripture, the Church of England preserves and teaches the three Creeds, — the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Creed of St. Athanasius. The ground upon which she bids us accept them, is, that ” they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture.”2 It is a striking proof of our claim to orthodoxy, that we alone, of the whole Catholic Church, recite the Athanasian Creed in the public services of the Church. This Creed commences with the assertion, that ” whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith.”

The English Church also recognizes the authority of the undisputed General Councils.3

• The Rule of Faith, p. 42. » Article viii.

s Homily against Peril of ‘Idolatry, Part 2.

Homily of Good Works, ii., Part i.

I Eliz. c. i. § 36.

” We, Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church, pro fessing the faith of the primitive and undivided Church, as

It was in these Councils that all the great heresies were rejected, and the main truths of the Catholic faith asserted.

If this be our principle as to the truth, it may be asked, — How is it that there exists such diversity of teaching among us? There is no doubt a good deal of diversity on certain points, not so much touching the main doctrines of the Creed (e.g., the doctrines of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Atonement, or the Divinity of the Holy Spirit), as on matters of practice, and the mode of carrying out our services, and the meaning given to some of our usages. This is to some extent unavoidable, seeing that in a great body of teachers there will be variety of thought and feeling. Judging by St. Paul’s Epistles, we see that in the apostles’ times, there was a good deal of disagreement, and this upon important points, which often greatly troubled the minds of the apostles. Much of the diversity of teaching in our midst is due to the fact, that men teach in the Church’s name that which is not her doctrine. Among our selves there is great unwillingness to carry authority too far, so as to crush the individual energies of earnest men. Often truth comes out the more clearly by allowing these differences to appear; and we are warned by our Lord against too great exercise of discipline, “lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.” *

based on Scripture, defined by the first four General Councils, and re-affirmed by the Fathers of the English Reformation,…” — From the Resolutions proposed to the Lambeth Con ference, 1867.

“To believe the Scripture and the Creeds in the sense of the ancient Primitive Church, to receive the four great General Councils so much magnified by antiquity, to believe all points of doctrine, generally received as fundamental in the Church of Christ, is a faith in which to live and die cannot but give salvation.” — Archbishop Laud, Conferenct with Fisher, xxxviii. i.

part ttbe dfaitb anb practice of Cburcb*

“THE COURSE OF GODLINESS is MADE UP OF

THESE TWO*, PIOUS DOCTRINES, AND GOOD WORKS: NEITHER ARE THE DOCTRINES WITHOUT GOOD WORKS ACCEPTABLE TO GOD; NOR ARE WORKS ALLOWABLE WORKS DONE APART FROM PIOUS

DOCTRINES.” — The Catechetical Lectures of St. Cyril, iv. 2.

” NEXT TO A SOUND RULE OF FAITH, THERE IS NOTHING OF SO MUCH CONSEQUENCE AS A SOBER STANDARD OF FEELING IN MATTERS OF PRACTICAL RELIGION \ AND IT IS THE PECULIAR HAPPINESS OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND TO POSSESS, IN HER AUTHORIZED FORMULARIES, AN AMPLE AND SECURE PROVISION FOR BOTH.”

Advertisement to ‘ The Christian Year,’ by the Rev John Keble.

CHRISTIAN DUTY.

IN the previous part of this book, we have striven to give, in general outline, a truth ful account of the English Church from its foundation by St. Augustine, St. Aidan, and their fellow missionaries, to its issue from the Reformation. Since that time, although there have been great movements within the Church, yet there has been no change in its constitution. We have established the position of the English Church from its beginning down to the present, as a true and living portion of the Holy Catholic Church of Jesus Christ.

Having established our position, we will proceed to consider our duties as Catholic Christians. We will pass on to learn what, as members of the Church, we are bound to believe and to do.

The Church being the covenanted sphere of divine grace and truth, it is our duty to seek safety to our souls within its fold. But it need hardly be said that mere membership in the Catholic body will not avail to our salvation, unless we believe truly and act faithfully.

In Holy Baptism, we were made members of the Church of Chiist, and on receiving thai sacrament we made certain promises.

We promised, —

To renounce the enemies of God, — the world, the flesh, and the devil:

To believe all the articles of the Christian faith: and,

To keep God’s holy will and command ments.

In other words, we engaged, — To avoid the evil:

To believe the truth: and, To do the right.

The keeping of these promises forms our part in the baptismal covenant or agreement, and is the condition of salvation. For this reason it was right that these promises should be made in our name in baptism, even though we were unconscious infants at the time. The observance of the baptismal promises is summed up in the words, Christian Duty.

Christian Duty comprises faith and practice, — what we ought to believe, and what we ought to do. We will first consider what we ought to believe, and then what we ought to do.

Chapter XV. The Faith of the Church

I. CHRISTIAN BELIEF.

IT is most important that we should not only act aright, but also believe aright. The true faith is not that which every man may fancy to be true, but that which God has revealed. It is our duty humbly to accept all that God plainly declares to be true without questioning, and to accept it on his authority as the Revealer; to act otherwise, is to be guilty of great pre sumption. It is most important too, because our faith colours our life. We are not likely to act aright, unless we believe aright. Many a man has been ruined by investing money in an undertaking which he believed to be sound, but which proved not to be so. Errors in faith lead to imperfections, and often to errors in life. St. Jude bids us to “build up ourselves on our most holy faith.”1 But we cannot build securely upon faulty foundations.

For these great reasons it is quite wrong to say, as so many do, — It does not matter what I believe, so long as I do what is right. The Holy Scriptures praise those “who keep

the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.”1

Having said this, we commence by asking, — What are we bound to believe as members of the Church of Christ? The answer to this question is, — WE ARE BOUND TO BELIEVE THE

CATHOLIC FAITH AS IT IS SET DOWN IN THE

CREEDS, which are the work of God the Holy Ghost in the Church.

The word creed is taken from the Latin word * credo,’ I believe. The Greek term for the Creed is ‘ the symbol; ‘ this word signified the earnest-money paid to secure a contract, and also the pass- word of the soldier. Thence it came to mean the belief to which a Christian pledged himself at baptism, as a part of the Christian covenant or contract; or the formula by which a Christian could make himself known to his fellow Christians.

Another name is * the rule of faith; ‘ i.e., something by which teaching may be measured or tested.

The Creeds took their origin from the need of some formula by which persons, desiring admission into the Church, could profess their faith at baptism. The root and germ of the Christian Creeds is found in our Lord’s words, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, bap tizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” *

No one form of creed seems to have been enforced by authority at first, but, growing as they did out of the baptismal formula, they have all the same skeleton, while the words and the order ot each varied in different Cnurches* 1 B*v »v \i. * St Matt, xxviii. 19.

The use of creeds is earlier than the writing of the first books of the New Testament. In St. Paul’s Epistles we find traces of the Creed in his allusion to ” the faithful saying,” l ” the form of sound words,”2 “the deposit.” 3

II. THE THREE CREEDS.

The Creeds are three in number; viz., — i. The Apostles’ Creed, ii. The Nicene Creed, iii. The Creed of St. Athanasius.

i. THE APOSTLES’ CREED.

The Apostles’ Creed receives its name from the fact that it is derived from the teaching of the apostles. It contains the main truths which they preached to the world, speaking only of those things which they had seen and heard, while they followed the Lord Jesus.

Although references to, and quotations from, the Creeds are met with in early Christian writers, yet a complete creed is riot found in any document until late in the Second century. The Apostles’ Creed, as we have it, is the Roman form of the Western Creeds, and is first found in the exposition of Rufinus in the fourth century. The late appearance of the Creed in writing is accounted for by the fact,.

1 2 Tim. i. 13.

3 i Tim. vi. 20. 2 Tim. i. 12 (R. V. margin).

that it was regarded as a precious secret, and committed to memory, being taught to persons just before baptism. In early times candidates were long under instruction for baptism, which, as a rule, was ministered by the bishop but twice a year, — at Easter and at Whitsuntide. On the eve of baptism, the Creed was taught, accompanied by a long and solemn address, the whole ceremony being named the ‘ traditio symboli,’ i.e., the delivery of the pass-word. Then, at baptism, on the question being put, each recited the Creed which had just been taught. This was called the ‘ redditio symboli,’ i.e., the giving back of the pass-word, upon which they were baptized. The Apostles’ Greed is a distinct and simple declaration of faith; thus differing from the Nicene Creed, which not only states the articles of the faith, but also adds clauses which shut out opposite errors. It differs also from the Athanasian Creed, which illustrates and in some cases ex plains the truths; while it not only contradicts, but also condemns errors.

The English Church has given considerable prominence to the Apostles’ Creed. It is printed in the Book of Common Prayer seven times. Speaking of this Creed, Bishop Forbes writes, — ” From the days of St. Paul to this, these articles have been the sum and substance of Christianity. Nothing less than that is sufficient. Nothing more than that is of absolute necessity to sal vation. When a child is baptized, the Church demands no more of him, or of his sponsors, than an assent to the Apostles’ Creed — and when the Christian soul is going out of the world to meet its Judge, it is in the terms of

the same Creed that the dying man is inter rogated.”1

ii. THE NICENE CREED.

The Nicene Creed is the Eastern exposition of the faith, and was drawn up by the fathers of the first General Council held at Nicaea A.D. 325. This Council was summoned to resist the false teaching of Arius, who held that our Lord was a creature, and not perfect God. On referring to this Creed, it will be seen how completely it sets forth the divine nature of Jesus Christ. The latter part of the Creed likewise contains a full statement of the divine nature of the Holy Spirit, and was added at the Second General Council A.D. 381. 3 This Council met at Constantinople to condemn the false teaching of Macedonius, who denied the Godhead of the Holy Spirit. Hence, this Creed is sometimes spoken of as the Creed of Constantinople, though generally as the Nicene Creed. The Nicene Creed comes to us with the highest possible authority. It was imposed by two General Councils, and is The Creed, par excellency of the Church; it is honored with a place in the chief service of the Church, — the Holy Eucharist.

ili. THE CREED OF ST. ATHANASIUS.

In the disputes with Arius and his followers, Athanasius, a chief speaker at the Council of Nicaea, was the leader of the orthodox party. Hence, those who held the doctrine of the Council of Nicaea were popularly called Athana-

x Explanation of the xxxix. Articles, 3rd Ed. p. 132.

* See page 60.

sians, as their opponents were called Arians. Athanasius died A.D. 373. After his death, — but at what period is> uncertain, — this Creed came into use; stating and illustrating the true doctrine in the manner usual to Athanasius and his followers. Hence, it was popularly called the Athanasian Creed, or the Creed held and defended by the followers of Athanasius.

The solemn language which this Creed adopts concerning unbeliever?, is not to be understood of those who have never received the faith. ” What things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law.” r It is the

III. COMPARISON OF

The Apostles’ Creed. The Nicene Creed.

I believe in God the Father I believe in one God the

Almighty, Maker of heaven Father Almighty, Maker of

and earth: heaven and earth, And of all things visible and invisible:

Church’s warning to those who wilfully reject the truth which God has made plain.

Creed of the Saints, and Anthem of the Blest, And calm-breathed warning of the kindliest love, *****

Who knows but myriads owe their endless rest To thy recalling, tempted else to rove?

J. KEBI.E.

Such is a brief account of the three Creeds, which come to us on the authority of the Church, and which ” may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture ” (Art. viii.).

THE CREEDS.

The Creed of St. Athanasius.

Whosoever will be saved: before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith.

Which Faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled: without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

And the Catholick Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;

Neither confounding the Persons: nor dividing the Sub stance.

For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son: and another of the Holy Ghost.

But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal.

Such as the Father is, such is the Son: and such is the Holy Ghost.

The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate: and the Holy Ghost uncreate.

The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible: and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible.

The Father eternal, the Son eternal: and the Holy Ghost eternal.

And yet they are not three eternals: but one eternal.

As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor thre* uncreated: but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.

142 The Faith of \the Church.

COMPARISON OF THB The Apostles’ Creed. The Nicene Creed.

And in Jesus Christ his And in one Lord Jesus only Son our Lord, Who was Christ, the only – begotten conceived by the Holy Ghost, Son of God, Begotten of his Born of the Virgin Mary, Father before all worlds, God

of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God, Begotten, not made, Being of one sub stance with the Father; By Whom all things were made, Who for us men, and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made Man, CREEDS (continued).

The Creed of St. Athanasius.

So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty: and the Holy Ghost Almighty.

And yet they are not three Almighties: but one Almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God: and the Holy Ghost is God.

And yet they are not three Gods: but one God.

So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord: and the Holy Ghost Lord.

And yet not three Lords: but one Lord.

For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity: to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;

So are we forbidden by the Catholick Religion: to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.

The Father is made of none: neither created, nor be gotten.

The Son is of the Father alone: not made, nor created, but begotten.

The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.

And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other: none is greater, or less than another;

But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together: and co-equal.

So that in all things, as is aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

He therefore that will be saved: must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation: that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

For the right Faith is that we believe and confess: that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man;

God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds: and Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;

Perfect God and perfect Man: of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting;

Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead: and inferior to the Father, as touching his Manhood.

Who although He be God and Man: yet He is not two, but one Christ; of the Church.

COMPARISON OF THR The Nicene Creed.

Suffered under Pontius Pilate, Was crucified, dead, and buried, He descended into hell;

The third day He rose again from the dead,

He ascended into heaven, And sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;

From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost; The Holy Catholick Church;

The Communion of Saints; The Forgiveness of sins;

The Resurrection of the body,

And the life everlasting. Amen.

And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried,

And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures,

And ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of the Father.

And He shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead: Whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, The Lord, and Giver of life, Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spake by the Prophets.

And I believe One Catho lick and Apostolick Church.

I acknowledge one Bap tism for the remission of sins,

And I look for the Resur rection of the dead,

And the life of the world to come. Amen.

’45 CREEDS (continued).

The Creed of St. Athanasius.

One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh: but by taking of the Manhood into God;

One altogether; not by confusion of Substance: but by unity of Person.

For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man: so God *nd Man is one Christ;

Who suffered for our salvation: Descended into hell,

Rose again the third day from the dead.

He ascended into heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty:

From whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies: and shall give account for their own works.

And they that have done good shall go into life everlast ing: and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.

This is the Catholick Faith: which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son: and to the Holy Ghost;

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be: world without end. Amen.

IV. THE ARTICLES OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH.

Of the articles of the Christian Faith we are now about to speak in detail, taking the Apostles Creed as the ground-work.

i. “I believe in God the Father almighty.” i. The Existence of God.

Holy Scripture does not begin by proving God’s existence; it takes it for granted. The existence of God is not a matter for mathe matical demonstration. We cannot prove his existence with the same kind of certainty that we can prove that two and two make four. We do sums with our heads, but we believe in God with our hearts. ” With the heart man believeth.”1 But if there is no such mathe matical demonstration of God’s existence, yet there are abundant proofs of another kind, which makes a moral certainty that He is.

We believe that the earth revolves on its axis once in every twenty-four hours, for reasons which admit of no other conclusion. So almost everything points to God’s existence: all nature speaks of a creator, and preserver. Conscience tells of him, for it points to an unseen judge. Reason induces us to believe in him, and then faith comes to our aid and confirms its conclu sions. What is wanting in actual demonstration, faith supplies. Reason leads us on far in our search for God, but the final step must be taken in faith; and when that step is taken, faith is assured, and becomes a God-given certainty.

The Faith of the Churc^. 147

” Without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”1

Faith in God involves much more than the mere assent of the mind to his existence. It implies love and devoted obedience, for loving obedience is the life of faith. To believe in God is by believing to love him, by believing to choose him, by believing to go unto him.

(a.) To believe in God is an instinct.

It is more natural to believe in God than to disbelieve in him. The idea of God is born in man, and is common to all nations. The most degraded races believe in some divinity or other, however debased their idea may be. As Dr. Liddon says, — “A nation of pure atheists is yet to be discovered. Man thinks of a Higher Power as naturally as he thinks of the world around him, or of himself. That man should in all ages and everywhere thus think of him, is of itself a presumption that He really exists.”2

The soul needs God, for it was made for him; or to use St. Augustine’s beautiful words, — ” Thou hast made us for thyself, and our heart can find no rest until it rests in these.” It has been added, If you would believe in God, look within; and the answer comes, My God I believe in these, because I have a soul.

(b.) A First Cause.

When we look out upon the universe, tha

• Some Elements of Religion, 3rd Edition, pp. 49, 50.

question arises, — Whence came all this: Who made it? There is but one answer, — What ever secondary causes there may be in creation, yet behind all is the First Cause, — The Cause of causes, — God. The question, Which was first, the hen or the egg? admits of but one reply; — Whichever was first, God made it. ” In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” l On a Bedouin being asked, How do you know there is a God? he replied, In the same way that I know on looking at the sand, when a man or a beast has crossed the desert; by his footprints in the world around me. As St. Paul puts it, — “The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead.”2

There is in the Confessions of St. Augustine a beautiful passage which tells us how nature leads up to God, — ” I questioned the earth, and it said, ‘ I am not He; ‘ and all that is in it con fessed the same. I questioned the sea and the depths, and the creeping things which have life, and they replied, ‘ We are not thy God, seek above us.’ I questioned the blowing winds, and the whole air with its inhabitants replied… ‘ I am not God.’ I questioned the heavens, sun, moon, and stars; ‘ Neither are we,’ say they, ‘ God whom you seek.’ And I said to all those things which stand about the doors of my flesh, ‘ Ye have told me of my God, that ye are not He; tell me now something of him.’ And they cried out with a loud voice, ” He *nade us.’” 3

1 Gen. i. i. * Rom. i. 20. 3 Confessions, x. 6.

(c.) The Revelation of God.

Again, if God is, it is reasonable to suppose that He should reveal himself to his creatures. He has done this, and that in various ways, to Conscience and in Nature, as we have seen above, — in the moral and prophetical revela tions recorded in the Scriptures, — to the Church, and, still further and above all, by the Incarnation of his Son.

2. The Nature of God.

” God is a Spirit,” x i.e., a Being possessing neither body nor bodily form; we cannot see God with our eyes, or touch him with our hands. Although Holy Scripture speaks of the face of God, of his eye, his ear, his arm, and so on, we are not to understand that He possesses these bodily members. Such expressions are only used because we have no language in which to describe the actions of a spirit. We have no other way in which to convey any ideas of the actions of God.

3. The Perfections of God. (a.) God is Self-existent.

We are creatures, and as such we are entirely dependent upon God. He is the Creator, and is completely independent of all created life. If the whole universe was brought to nought, He would remain unmoved; once, He was without creation, and that from all eternity. The name by which He made himself known to his chosen people is Jehovah, which signifies 1 St. John iv. 24.

” I Am that I Am,” * and denotes the Selfexistence of God.

(b.) God is Eternal.

He has neither beginning nor ending. With God there is neither past nor future, but an eternal present. HE is. The circle is the emblem of eternity. In the center of the circle of eternity is God. However far back we go, we are no nearer the beginning of the life of God, for He has no beginning. ” Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever the earth and the world were made, thou art God from everlasting, and world without end.” 2 (c.) God is Holy.

The nature of God is the essence of good ness. God is the Good One. ” There is none good but One, that is God.” 3 It is because He is good, that we are able to love and obey him. We can only love and obey a perfect Being, and all evil is imperfection. The worship of the angels ” Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of Hosts,” 4 is his right. The holi ness of God is so excellent, that ” his angels He charged with folly,” 5 and ” the heavens are not clean in his sight.”6 (d.) God is Almighty.

He can do whatsoever He pleases, and that without effort. His will is supreme. ” With God all things are possible.”? Yet He cannot

s St. Matt. xix. 17. * Isa. vi. 3.

? Job iv. 1 8. 6 Ibid, xv. 15.

sin, otherwise He would not be perfect. Nothing, however trivial, happens independently of God; not even a sparrow falls to the ground without him.1 God is so powerful that He can create worlds, and though his creatures have rebelled against him, yet in the end ” all things shall be subdued unto him.” 2 (e.) God is Omnipresent.

He is present everywhere, upholding, govern ing, and caring for all his creatures; seeing and knowing all things, past, present, and future. 41 He is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart; neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.” 3 ‘

.(/.) ” God is Love.” *

God never changes; as He is, so He has ever been. He is, and ever has been love. Love is of the very being of God. He can as soon cease to exist, as He can cease to love. But love, without an adequate object upon which to spend itself, would exist as an unsatisfied desire. A solitary deity would be but an imperfect being. God was never alone, He is three persons in •one God from all eternity.

God is infinite love, and infinite love alone can satisfy infinite love. It was out of love that God created the universe. The love of angels and men could not satisfy the love of God, because their love is finite and imperfect.

» Heb. iv. 12, 13. ” i St. John iv. 8.

Perfect love exists, and ever has existed, in the divine society of the ever blessed Three in One. The Father loves the Son, and the Son loves the Father, with perfect and eternal love; and Both love the Spirit, who is the eternal bond of love between the Father and the Son. Thus the revelation that “God is love,” prepares the mind for the revelation of the mystery of the Holy Trinity.

4. The Mystery of the Holy Trinity.

There is one God in three persons, — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. These three persons are co-equal in all things. ” The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, and yet they are not three Gods, but one God.” x This is the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, taught by the Church, and proved by the Scriptures. While the Holy Scriptures teach that there is but one God, they speak of each of the three persons as divine, and thus prove to us their co-equal Godhead. The doctrine of the Trinity in Unity is a great mystery. A mystery is a truth revealed by God which we are therefore bound to believe, but which we are unable fully to understand. Though the doctrine of the Trinity is above the understanding, it is not contrary to it. It is reasonable that there should be mysteries in religion, and above all * that there should be mystery about the Being of God. If we could grasp the doctrine of the Trinity, we should ourselves be God. The fly on the ceiling cannot understand the nature of 1 Athanasia** Crted.

man, because man is so much beyond a fly in the scale of creation. But there is less interval between a fly and a man, than there is between man and God; for man is a creature, and God is the infinite Creator.

It is said that on a certain occasion a preacher named Alanus, promised to make plain to his hearers on the next Sunday, the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity. While considering the matter by the sea shore, he saw a child with a spoon in his hand walking to and fro between the sea and a hole which he had made in the sand. Alanus asked the child what he was doing. He replied, — I am trying to empty the sea into this hole. Alanus said, — Why dost thou waste thy time in attempting an impossibility? The child again replied, — I am not more wasting my time than thou art, for thou wilt no sooner get all the knowledge of the Holy Trinity into thy small mind, than I shall empty the great sea into this hole in the sand.1

Though a philosopher cannot explain the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, a child can believe it. This great truth is not one about which we are to puzzle our minds. We are simply to believe it, because God has revealed it to the Church, and the Church teaches it. Reason becomes lost in wonder, and gives place to adoring faith.

“The Catholic Faith is this; that we WORSHIP one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity…. In all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be WORSHIPPED.”2

1 This story is also related of St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo. * Athanasian Creed.

154 Thf Faith °f the Church.

5. The Fatherhood of God.

God is eternally the Father of his onlybegotten Son. That is to say, independently of his relationship to the universe and created life, God has ever been the Father. There never was a time when He was not the Father of the eternal Son. But in a secondary sense, it is true that Jesus Christ, as the Son of Man, was begotten of his Father in time: as it is written, “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten these.” l And this is explained by the fact that Jesus Christ, as man, had no father but God. Thus, not only in his divine nature, but in his human nature also, Jesus Christ was in a peculiar sense the Son of God.

As a truth flowing out of that which we have stated, God is our Father. If God is the Father of all men, in the sense that all men are his offspring, He is nevertheless, in a more excellent manner, the Father of Christians, through their union with his only-begotten, incarnate Son. ” When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman… that we might receive the adoption of sons: and because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father.” 2 The Son of God was made Son of Man, in order that the sons of men may become sons of God.3 In Holy Baptism we are made members of Christ, and the children of God children of God, because members of Christ, the only begotten Son of God.

1 Heb. i. 5. • •• Gal. iv. 4-6.

» See Rom. viii. 29.

The Faith of the Church. 15*5

ii. ” Maker of Heaven and Earth.” i. The Creation of the Universe.

If we only go back far enough, we come to a time when God alone existed. He had thus existed from all eternity. For endless ages God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, was alone in eternal life, and in perfect happiness. Although all-sufficient in himself, God had none to bless, none to care for, none to rule, and none to give him worship. How wonderful it is to think upon that eternity in which there was none but God! But it was not always to be thus; God was pleased to surround himself with a beautiful creation. Almighty God only can create; for to create is to bring forth out of nothing. It is not only to make things out of existing matter, but to make the very matter itself, and then to shape it. So the vast universe, of which our world is a very small part, came into being at the will of God. ” Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God; so that things which are seen were not made of things whicji do appear.” x The history • of creation is given in the first chapter of Genesis, and is summed up in the oft-repeated words “And God said,”… “And it was so.” ” He spake, and it was done, He commanded, and it stood fast.” 2

In this work of creation the three persons of the blessed Trinity co-operated. ” In the be ginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And * Heb. xi. 3. * Ps. xxxiii. Q.

the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” l ” God created all things by Jesus Christ.” 2 ” By the Word of the Lord,” i.e., by the Son, “were the heavens made; and all the hosts of them by the Breath of his mouth,” i.e., by the Holy Spirit.3

In the first chapter of Genesis, creation is represented as taking place in six days. We need not suppose that these were days of twenty-four hours long. The expression ‘ day ‘ in the Bible is often used of more extended periods. By the six days of creation, we may understand vast periods of creative power, in which our earth was being prepared for the habitation of man. In briefly describing the work of creation, the account appears to dwell upon the leading feature of each period. Holy Scripture sets before us creation as the work of God, — an orderly work, in which less perfect types of being were succeeded by more perfect types, until the highest type was reached in man. Some have thought that the world, as we now see it, was created directly by God; others, that the higher forms and organisms with which we are familiar, were developed by divine power out of the lower forms and organisms which God at first made. This idea is known as the theory of evolution. If this should hereafter prove to be true, there is nothing in the account given in Genesis incon sistent with such a theory. If the theory of evolution be true, it can only represent the method of God’s working, He who alone created all things developing them by this law of growth.

Difficulties have been felt by some in recon ciling the discoveries of science with the records of creation given in Genesis. Probably with the advance of knowledge these difficulties will disappear. Bishop Forbes has said, — ” While the Christian starts with the determination 1 Let God be true, and every man a liar,’ he must not exact too much of the text of the Bible, or fancy that everything is to be made clear to him. If the Bible were to solve every difficulty in science, man would need omnisci ence to understand it, and language that would suit one state of advance in learning, would be totally unintelligible to an earlier stage…. The devout Christian feels very certain, that God in revelation speaks the same language as God in nature.” x

There are three great divisions of Creation. Beings purely spiritual. Beings partly spiritual, and partly material. Things purely material.

To the first of these divisions belong the angels, to the Second belongs man.

” Thy almighty hand, which is always one and the same, created angels in heaven and worms upon earth; not higher in those, not lower in these. For as no other hand could make an angel, so neither could any other make a worm: as none else could create heaven, so neither could anyone else create the least leaf upon the tree; as none else could make a body, so neither can anyone else make an hair black or white, but only thine almighty hand, to 1 Explanation of the Nicene Creed, 2nd ed. pp. 101, 103.

which all things are alike, possible. For it is not more possible to him to create a worm than an angel, nor more impossible to stretch out the heavens than a leaf.” J

2. The Creation of the Angels.

The highest beings in the scale of creation are the angels. Their existence and work in the universe is abundantly testified by Holy Scripture, and the teaching of the Church. The angels are spiritual beings, created certainly before man, if not before matter. The word angel means ‘ messenger,’ but this was not their first name, for at their creation there were none, so far as we know, to whom they could act as messengers. Their first name was “sons of God,” and under this title they are described as wondering spectators of the creation of the world.2 In the epistle to the Hebrews, 3 they are spoken of as ” ministering spirits (literally, ‘spirits of worship’) sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation.” From this passage we learn that their work consists in the worship of Gocl, and in the service of men. The angels are moral agents, that is to say, they possess freewill, and are able to choose between good and evil.

There are intimations in Holy Scripture of various orders or ranks in the angelic hosts. These are generally supposed to be nine in number, and are thus named: —

1. SERAPHIM. Isaiah vi. 2, 6.

2. CHERUBIM. Gen. iii. 24. Ps. xviii. 10.

1 St. Augustine, SoKl. 9. * Job xxxviii. 7, 3 i. 13, 14.

Eph. i. 21. Col. i. 1 6.

8. ARCHANGELS. i Thess. iv. 1 6. Jude 9.

9. ANGELS. Heb. i. 13. i Pet. iii. 22.

3. The Fall of the Angels.

The angels were created in a state of sanctity, but under probation. In the distant past they were put on their trial. As to the means adopted for this ordeal we know nothing with certainty; but the Church has generally held that their temptation was to pride.2 Under the trial, a number of the angels fell: they were thrust out of heaven, and became fallen angels or devils. These fallen spirits St. Jude 3 des cribes as ” the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation.” At the head of this rebel host is Satan, thought to have been one of the Cherubim, or spirits of know ledge, owning the name of Lucifer, the lightbearer. Of his fall our blessed Lord speaks in the words, ” I beheld Satan as lightning fall

* ” It seemeth that there was no other way for angels to sin, but by reflex of their understanding upon themselves; when being held with admiration of their own sublimity and honor, the memory of their subordination unto God and their dependency on him was drowned in this conceit; whereupon their adoration, love, and imitation of God could not choose but be also interrupted. The fall of angels therefore was pride.” — Hooker, Eccl. Polity, i. 4. 3.

» verse 6.

ibo The Faith of the Church.

from heaven.”1 The fall of the devils was without remedy; may be, they had sinned deliberately, with full knowledge of what they were doing, and of the conseqnences of their sin. When the new race of mankind appeared on the earth, the fallen angels became their tempters and enemies. It seems probable that the human race was created by God to take, after due trial, the vacant place in heaven, once occupied by the fallen angels. If this be so, the root of their ill-will toward mankind is jealousy. When the Son of God was made man, one great purpose of his coming was to free mankind from the power of the demons. ” For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.”1 That the devil and his angels will in the end be cast out for ever, is the doom which the Scriptures reveal.

4. The Creation of Man.

In the creation of our world, we see a gradual progress from lower to higher forms of life. It was upon the sixth day that creation was crowned by the appearance of the human race. We read, ” And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness…. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.” 3 We have referred before to the co-operation of the three persons of the ever blessed Trinity in creation. From the use of the term ” us ” in this passage, we learn that the blessed Trinity conferred together concerning the creation of * St. Luke x. 1 8. a I St. John iii. 8. 3 Gen. i. 26, 27.

man. This conference marks man’s special dignity, for there is no record of such an action on the part of God in calling the lower creatures into being.

Man was made in the image and likeness of God. We may understand this image of God to be in the threefold structure of the soul, — the memory, the understanding, and the will. The image of God, which includes these three great powers of the soul, is the natural preparation for his likeness which is supernatural, or above nature. This image can never be effaced how ever marred; it remained stamped upon the soul after the fall. We are all born in the image / of God. The likeness of God is man’s corres pondence with his will, and depends upon the right use of the gifts of grace. A soul in grace bears the likeness of God; the higher the state of grace, the closer the likeness. The likeness was well nigh, if not altogether,. lost at the fall.

In creating man, God formed a being capable of knowing, serving, and loving him. To do these things is the end of man. That this purpose might be intelligently fulfilled, He gave man, like the angels, moral freedom.

5. The Fall of Man.

Man was put on his trial in the garden of Eden. To test him, God forbade his eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The devil came and tempted man to dis obey. He yielded, and so fell away from God.1 The act implies much more than at first sight appears, for it was the deliberate sin of a being 1 Gen. ii. and iii.

1 62 The Faith of the Church.

created in a state of grace, and possessing full knowledge and clear light.

By his sin, man lost that likeness of God in which he had been created, and his whole moral being fell into disorder. The nature thus dis ordered he passed on to all his successors. It is true of every child born into the world, — ” Behold, I was shap&n in wickedness; and in sin hath my mother conceived me.” l All people to be born in the future were ‘ in Adam ‘ when he fell, and they too fell in him. Adam lost the guiding light of God’s likeness, and this defect he handed down to his posterity.

This is original or birth sin, the sin of our origin or birth. It is more of the nature of a serious defect than of a positive taint, and hence it is the object of God’s compassion rather than of his wrath.

The fall was the occasion of the promise of the Deliverer, ” the Seed of the woman,” 3 the incarnate God himself, who should, in due time, bruise the serpent’s head. At the cost of a vast personal sacrifice, God has made recovery from the fall possible. Of this great restoration, we shall learn more when we come to speak of the Incarnation and Redemption, and of their ex tension in the sacraments.

There is still within each of us a bias toward evil, and sad experience teaches that in our natural state it is easier to do wrong than right, or as St. Paul says, — ” When I would do good, evil is present with me.” 3 This is the proof that we are a fallen race. It is the work of grace to rectify our natural tendency to evil, and by degrees to give us the love of right, and the power to do it.

1 Ps. k. 5. » Gen. iii. 15. » Rom. vii. 21.

6. The Origin of Evil.

The fall of man is connected with a dark and mysterious subject, — the origin of evil. Whence came evil, and why is it permitted? These are old questions which are ever new. That evil is here in various forms, and that too by per mission of God who is perfectly good and just, is an evident fact. We have experience of moral evil within our hearts, and we see its shadow in the pain, and sorrow, and death in the world around. What account can we give of its presence? We will answer the question in the words of the great St. Augustine, — ” Evil… is not any substance; for were it a sub stance, it would be good…. Thou didst make all things good, nor is there any substance that was not made by these…. I enquired what iniquity was, and found it not to be a substance, but a perversion of the will, bent aside from these, O God.” ‘ St. Augustine here gives the true account of the origin of evil. Evil comes from the misuse of freewill in beings who were originally created good. The perverted freedom of the will of the creature, this it was that gave evil its birth.2

In creating the universe, God might, had it pleased him, have refrained from giving exist ence to responsible creatures. He might have made nothing higher in the scale of created life than the animals now subject to man, giving

* Confessions, vii. 12. 16.

a ” You will find that it is not God who is the author of the present evils, seeing that He has ordered your nature so as to be its own master and free, but rather the recklessness that chooses the worse in preference to the better.” — St. Gregory Nyssen, Great Catechism v.

the whole universe ” a law which shall not be broken.” But God desired something greater than such a constrained service as this. He desired a free obedience and a willing love, which nothing thus made could have given him. In his desire to receive such an unforced obedience and generous love, He created angels and men, endowing them with a gift which He bestowed upon no other of his creatures. This gift is that of moral freedom, or freewill. Angels and men alone of all creatures can say, We need not do this or that unless we choose.

But if the will is to be really free, it must be capable of choosing evil as well as good. If there was no evil to reject, goodness would be inevitable. We could not help being good-, if there was no chance of being wicked. And is it not easy to see that such goodness as this would be of no value, and be unworthy of the name of goodness? Goodness is worthless unless freely chosen in the face of possible evil. If we realize all this, it is not difficult to see that the ability to choose God and goodness carries with it of necessity the awful power to reject both Him and it. The possession of a freewill implies the possible choice of evil as well as good. Hence, as far as we can see, the possibility of doing evil is an unavoidable condition of our trial here on earth.

In the case of man, the temptation to 4o wrong came from without. Man was tempted by the devil, the chief of the fallen angels. Thus, as far as our earth is concerned, evil came from the devil. Bishop Forbes, in summing up the question we are considering says, — “The Catholic Christian, enlightened by the Spirit,

and overcome by a sense of his own feebleness of intellect, traces up the origin of evil to the fall of the angels, and leaves it there.”1 He believes evil to be no part of God’s original creation, which was pronounced by God himself to be very good. “And God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good.”2 He believes that evil entered this world from without, and so will be cast out a^ain at the last.

iii. ” I believe in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.”

i. The Doctrine of the Incarnation.

We are now to consider the mystery of the Incarnation. The Nicene Creed states the doctrine of the divine nature of Jesus Christ, and his Incarnation, with a greater fulness than the Apostles’ Creed. The words are, — I BELIEVE IN ONE LORD JfiSUS CHRIST, THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD, BEGOTTEN OF HIS FATHER BEFORE ALL WORLDS, GOD OF GOD, LIGHT OF LIGHT, VERY GOD OF VERY GOD, BEGOTTEN, NOT MADE, BEING OF ONE SUB STANCE WITH THE FATHER; BY WHOM ALL THINGS WERE MADE, WHO FOR US MEN, AND FOR OUR SALVATION CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, AND WAS INCARNATE BY THE HOLY GHOST OF THE VIRGIN MARY, AND WAS MADE MAN.

The word of in the expressions “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God,” signifies ‘out of,’ or ‘from.’ It implies the 1 Nicene Creed, p. 30 3 Gen. i. 31.

The Incarnation.

“WHEN THE FULNESS OF THE TIME WAS COME, GOD

SENT FORTH HIS SON, MADE OF A WOMAN.”— Gal. iy. 4.

eternal generation of the Son from the Father. In reciting the Nicene Creed, a slight stress should be laid upon the word to give the proper meaning. St. Hippolytus says, — ” When I say that the Son is distinct from the Father, I do not speak of two Gods, but as it were, light from light, and the stream from the fountain, and the ray from the sun.”

The word incarnation signifies ‘the takin’g of flesh,’ and gives a brief summary of the doctrine stated in the first chapter of the Gospel accord ing to St. John, “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” x It is most important that the Christian should be well instructed in the doctrine of the Incarnation, for the whole scheme of redemption circles round this great foundation truth of our religion. We shall not give God the loving gratitude which is his due, nor will our hope of salvation rest secure, until we have grasped the truth concerning the person and office of the Saviour. On these accounts the Athanasian Creed, after stating the doctrine of the Trinity, declares, — ” Further more, it is necessary to everlasting salvation, that we also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

What is the right faith concerning the Incar nation? It is this; — The Second person of the ever blessed Trinity, God the Son, out of love to mankind, took man’s nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary of her sub stance. This was accomplished by a miracle, for the blessed mother was a virgin both before and after his birth. Jesus was conceived by the direct action of God the Holy Ghost, who 1 i, 14-

1 68 The Faith of the Church.

overshadowed the blessed Virgin Mary, the agency of a human father being thus superseded. Jesus Christ alone, of all the human race, was born of one human parent. By this miraculous conception, He escaped the defects of original sin, and was born perfect Man. The Virginbirth is the guarantee that no entail of birthsin was passed on to him.

By this amazing act of condescension, He did not cease to be perfect God, but He added a pure human nature to his divine nature.

THUS, OUR LORD POSSESSES TWO NATURES,

THE NATURE OF GOD, AND THE NATURE OF MAN J AND THESE TWO NATURES ARE UNITED IN HIS ONE DIVINE PERSON, WHOLE AND WITH OUT CONFUSION, AND THAT FOR ALL ETERNITY.

The life, and the power, and the influence of the Godhead was in all that Christ said and did: his words and actions as man, being the words and actions of God, were thus effectual to the redemption of mankind.

2. The Purpose of the Incarnation.

Why was God made man? Was it simply to save fallen man from sin, and from the punishment of sin; or were there other pur poses behind this? If there had been no sin, would He still have come?

We may reply, that although it has not been clearly revealed, yet there are weighty reasons for believing that God’s purpose of becoming man was prior to and independent of the fall. We must admit that the Incarnation is the greatest honor and blessing our race has re ceived, or ever can receive. Human nature

was thereby taken into closest union with God, and that for all eternity. It is difficult to believe that this honor depended upon sin, so that if there had been no sin, it would not have been granted. It is difficult to believe that we are better off as sinners, than we should have been if not fallen.

Assuming that the eternal Son would havecome as man if there had been no fall, what, in this view, is the purpose of the Incarnation? It is that the whole creation may be united to the Creator, God choosing man’s nature for this end, since man is the representative of creation. As a being partly spiritual and partly material, man is akin to the angels and alsoto the animals and lifeless matter. There are hints in the New Testament that this is the true view of the purpose of the Incarnation.1

But if this view be correct, how is it that there are so few and such remote references to it in the Bible? We reply that the Bible, with the exception of the first chapter of Genesis, is the record of the history of fallen man, and of his restoration from a fallen state, and therefor® it is occupied with the remedy which the fall rendered necessary. It views things as they are, rather than as they might have been under other circumstances.

But if the Incarnation would have taken place irrespective of sin, we cannot say the same of our Lord’s sufferings and death. These were the result of sin. Viewing the Incarnation apart from the fall, it is a matter for adoring gratitude that when sin entered into the world,

1 See Rom. viif.?9 J?ph-. ». iQj, 22. Col. i. 15-21; ii. 10. Heb. ii. 10.

God was not turned aside from his purpose of uniting creation to himself; even though the fall rendered his bitter death and passion a necessity to our pardon and restoration. This view exalts the Incarnation as an exhibition of a love which not even man’s sinful rebellion could quench, though involving the incarnate God in the added humiliation of suffering as the fruit of our sins.

3. The Blessed Virgin Mary.

In the Incarnation of the Son of God, there were two agents, — the one divine, the other human. The divine agent was God the Holy Ghost: the human agent was the blessed Virgin Mary.

The blessed Virgin is said to have been the child of Jewish parents named Joachim and Anne. Of her birth and early life, Holy Scrip ture and history are alike silent. But we may reverently believe that, with a view to her future destiny as the mother of the Lord, she was like the prophet Jeremiah,1 and the Baptist,2 specially sanctified from the womb, and that she lived a life of spotless innocence. How could she otherwise have been fitted for her high and mysterious office as the mother of the incarnate God?

It was to the pure maiden of Nazareth, thus chosen and prepared by God, that the angel Gabriel came, bearing the offer from God of an honor so amazing, that compared with it every earthly honor is as nothing. The angel’s message was nothing less than that x Jer. i. 5. * St. Lukei. 15.

The Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

” Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with these: blessed art thou among women.” — St. Luke i. 28.

Almighty God would, with her consent, take human form in her womb. ” Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with these; blessed art thou among women…. Fear not, Mary: for thou has found favor with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest.”1

Then arose in Mary’s mind the wondering question, how could she, a virgin, bear a child? Had ever maiden become mother without the agency of human father? ” Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? ” 2 There is no doubting in her question; Mary believes that it will be as the angel said, and only en quires how it will be accomplished.

It was then that Gabriel announced to Mary that the agency of a human father would be superseded, and that, through the power of God, a virgin-birth would be accomplished. He assured her that in conceiving and bringing forth her Child, her virgin-chastity would remain, that she would still be a virgin.3 He declared that she should fulfill the mother’s part, God the Holy Ghost quickening the powers of nature. “And the angel answered and said unto her, the Holy Ghost shall come upon these, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow these: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of these shall be called the Son of God.” 4

But even yet the Incarnation was not

* St. Luke i. 28, etc. 2 Ibid. 34.

» See Note, p. 175. 4 St. Luke i. 35.

accomplished; there wanted the consent of Mary to be the agent in its fulfillment.

Let us pause to consider what this announce ment involved to Mary. She must have seen, by a pure womanly instinct, that there lay before her a time of keenest trial, of suspicion and agonizing doubt. If she accepted her amazing destiny, would not the finger of reproach be pointed at her as the holy Child grew in her womb? How could she explain her condition even to those nearest and dearest to her? How terrible must the facing of all this have been to one, whose soul was as pure as the driven snow? What would Joseph, to whom she was about to be married, think of her? What he did think we know; for we are told that at first “he was minded to put her away privily,” to hide her from the shame which he began to think she had brought upon herself. Only a voice from heaven reassured him, and relieved him from the painful suspicion. Beyond all this, there was the thought of the strangely mysterious association with Almighty God and his deep purposes, and all it would cost her to maintain such a dignity, which must have tempted the blessed Virgin to hesitate in accepting the divine call. “What might not she have to be, to do, to endure, to surrender, to look forward to, who in a moment learned in the depth of her obscurity that she had been chosen and was called out of all mankind to be the mother of the ‘Son of the Highest,’ the ‘ Son of God,’ the ‘ Christ.’ ” ‘

It was a tremendous crisis in the history of the world. Would the purpose of the eternal Word to become incarnate for us men and for our salvation be accepted, or would his mer ciful design, for a time at least, be thwarted? The immediate decision, in a certain real sense, lay with the blessed Virgin Mary, as a free moral agent; and we may well thank Almighty God that she made the right de cision. In the face of all that awaited her, by the grace of God, the blessed1 Virgin, with perfect faith x and complete self-surrender, accepted the wondrous call of God, and uttered the eventful words, — ” Behold the handmaid of the Lord: be it unto me according to thy word.” 2 In that central moment, the everlast ing Son of the Father, who took upon him to deliver man, did not abhor the Virgin’s womb. He began to take human form, and Mary be came the Mother of God. 3

Well may we make the words of one of our English bishops, the pious and affectionate Bishop Hall, our own, — ” But how gladly do we Second the angel in the praise of her, which was more ours than his! How justly do we bless her, whom the angel pronounced blessed. How worthily is she honored of men, whom the angel proclaimed beloved of God! O blessed Mary, he cannot bless these, he cannot honor these too much, that deifies these not! That which the angel said of these, thou hast prophesied of thyself: we believe the angel and these; ‘All generations shall call these blessed/ by the fruit of whose womb all generations are blessed.”

1 St. Luke i. 45. * Ibid. 38. 3 See Note, p. 175.

NOTE ON THE TITLE ” EVER- VIRGIN.’

The Church has ever held that the mother of Jesus was a virgin both before and after the birth of Jesus. St. Augustine speaks of her as “a virgin conceiving, a virgin bringing forth, a virgin dying.” The title ‘ever-virgin’ is applied to her by St. Athanasius. The words “And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son” (St. Matt. i. 25), do not imply that she ceased to be a virgin after the birth of Jesus, or’ that there were other children born later. They are intended simply to make it quite plain that Joseph was not the father of Mary’s child. They guard Mary’s virginity up to the time of the birth of her first and only son. The term ‘ firstborn ‘ does not imply a Second born. There were among the Jews certain rites performed in reference to the first son born into a family; and thus he was called ‘ the firstborn ‘ whether there were other children or not (see Ex. xiii. 2; St. Luke ii. 22, 23). The brethren of our Lord, alluded to in the Gospels, were not the children of the Virgin Mother. They are generally supposed either to have been children of Joseph by a previous marriage, or to have been the cousins of our Lord. Bishop Lightfoot, after a most careful study of the question, comes to the conclusion that they were the former. When we realize that God him self took flesh in Mary’s womb, it is inconceivable that other children should afterwards have been born of her. See Bright, St. Leo on the Incarnation, Note 9, pp. 136, 137.

NOTE ON THE TITLE ‘ MOTHER OF GOD.’

The expression ‘ Mother of God ‘ is a translation of the Greek word Theotocos. The title was solemnly ascribed to the blessed Virgin Mary by the General Council of Ephesus, A.D. 431, to express the truth that the Son of God took our nature upon him by being born of a human mother. The Council met to condemn the heresy of Nestorius, who taught that in Christ were two persons, the person of God and the person of man; the person of God being, as he said, united some time after birth to the person of man. The Catholic faith is, that there is but one person in Christ, that of God; and that this divine person took the manhood into God in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary. Thus the title ‘ Mother of God,’ was given to safeguard the truth of the Incarnation. As Dr. Bright says, — “The Greek terra (Theotocos)) by its very form and sound, gives prominence to the Divinity of him who, as man, was born of Mary \

whereas the English phrase begins, so to speak, at the other end, and lays greater stress on the supremely privileged motherhood. The doctrinal intention is the same in both cases.” (Way marks in Church History, p. 180.)

In speaking of the blessed Virgin as ‘ Mother of God,’ it is not meant that she was mother of the divine nature, but of the human nature of him who is God, and who took of her that human nature. She is mother of ‘ the divine Son considered as under the conditions of incarnation. ‘

4. The Earthly Life of our Lord.

Of the miraculous conception of our blessed Lord, we have already spoken. In the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary the Godhead was mysteriously united to the manhood, by the operation of the Holy Ghost. The Incarnation dates from the time that the angel Gabriel announced the tidings to the blessed Virgin Mary at Nazareth. This event is known as the Annunciation, and is commemorated in the Church on March 25, commonly called Ladyday. We have also a daily memorial of the Incarnation in the Song of the blessed Virgin Mary, ” My soul doth magnify the Lord,” sung at evensong. This Psalm was uttered by the blessed Virgin upon her visit to St. Elizabeth, after the angel had made known to her that she should be the mother of the Lord. Nine months after the Annunciation, our Lord was born at Bethlehem, the city of David, whither the Virgin Mother had resorted with St. Joseph, to be enrolled in the census ordered by the Roman emperor. Many years before, the prophet Micah had foretold that our Lord should be born in that city.1 The Church

The Nativity.

” Unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.”— St. Luke\\. n.

commemorates the birth of our Lord on Christ mas-day.

The entrance of the Son of God into the world in human form was an event of unspeakable importance. It was an event well known in heaven, for it is recorded that the mystery of the Incarnation was revealed to the angel-hosts for their acceptance. <fcWhen He bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.”1 But if well known in heaven, it was unknown on earth, save to St. Mary and St. Joseph, and to certain shepherds to whom the angels an nounced the tidings, “for unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.”2 The shepherds, thus warned, hastened to Bethlehem, and there found the divine child, with his mother, in a cave or stable, in which, from the crowded •state of the inn, they had been obliged toseek shelter.

On the eighth day after birth, our blessed Lord was circumcised, and received his name of JESUS, which means ‘ God the Saviour.’ Thirty-two days later, He, with his blessed mother, further complied with the Jewish law* Jesus was presented in the temple, and the blessed Virgin was purified after childbirth, though the conception of her divine child by the Holy Ghost, without human father, rendered such a ceremony needless. It was on this occasion that an aged servant of God, named Simeon, took our blessed Lord in his arms, and uttered the touching ‘Nunc Dimittis,’ ” Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in 1 Heb. i. 6. a St. Luke ii. 11.

peace,” which we sing daily at evensong. These two events are celebrated in the Church on January i, and on February 2, eight days and forty days respectively from Christmasday.

The next recorded event in our Lord’s life was the visit of certain wise men from the far East. These wise men, or Magi as they are called, were probably astrologers. Their atten tion was drawn to a star of unusual appearance in the heavens, and, divinely taught, they resolved to follow its course. The star led them to Bethlehem, and rested over the very house in which the holy child was. Entering in, they offered their homage to the newborn king, and opening their treasures they presented gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. The object of their visit was made known to Herod the king, who, regarding our Lord as a rival come to dethrone him, determined to put him out of the way. To this end, Herod cruelly ordered all the male children of the age of two years and under in Bethlehem and the district to be put to death. The massacre of these children is regarded by the Church as martyrdom for Christ’s sake, and is commemorated yearly three days after Christmas-day, — the Feast of the Holy Innocents. Herod’s intention to kill our Lord was frustrated; for the angel of God warned St. Joseph to flee with the holy child and his mother into Egypt, commanding him to remain there with his sacred charge until the death of Herod. When Herod was dead, the holy family returned from Egypt and dwelt at Nazareth, the home of the blessed Vrgin Mary. Thus was fulfilled ths

prophecy of Hosea, — “Out of Egypt have I called my Son.” x

There now follows a period of some years, during which, with the exception of one event, we have no particulars of our Lord’s earthly life. Of this event we must speak. It was the custom for Jewish boys on reaching the age of twelve years, to be admitted to the full privileges of the Jewish Church. At this age our blessed Lord was taken by his parents to Jerusalem. It was the occasion of the yearly Passover, and large companies of pilgrims went up to the feast. Among the bustle and excitement of the holy city, the divine child was lost among the crowd. After a three days’ anxious search, He was discovered in the temple, whither He had resorted. The Jewish doctors, or teachers of the law, held their schools in the courts of the temple, and in one of these schools Jesus was found. On the blessed mother gently chid ing her son, He replied, — ” Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?”2 These words form the first recorded utterance of our incarnate Lord. From this time to the com mencement of his ministry, a period of eighteen years, He lived a hidden life at Nazareth, being subject to his parents, and labouring as a car penter under the direction of St. Joseph, his foster-father. The hiddenness of our blessed Lord’s life, and his patient waiting for the commencement of his public ministry, are suggestive of great lessons.

When Jesus reached the age of thirty years, — the legal age at which, in the beginning, the Levites of the Jewish Church commenced their 1 St. Matt. ii. 15. a St. Luke ii. 49.

public service, — He came forth from his retire ment. His first step was to seek baptism at the hands of St. John the Baptist, his kinsman, whose wonderful birth had taken place a few months before his own. Descending into the bed of the river Jordan, He received a baptism which was attended with miraculous circum stances. The heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit, in the form of a dove, lighted upon him, while the eternal Father proclaimed him to be his beloved Son, in whom He was well pleased; thus, the Three Persons of the’ blessed Trinity were manifested.1 By his baptism Jesus was revealed as the Christ, the anointed one, — anointed by the Spirit to be the prophet, priest, and king of his people.. This baptism formed our blessed Lord’s in auguration to his public ministry.

Immediately following this event, came the temptation of Jesus, a transaction veiled in deepest mystery. He retired to the solitude of the wilderness, where He remained without food for forty days: at the close of this period, in his weakened state, Satan drew nigh to assail him with a threefold temptation. From this personal conflict with the evil one, Jesus came forth pure and sinless; Satan being vanquished, but only to renew his attack in the dark hours of the Passion.

Our blessed Lord now began his active ministry. He announced that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, and that He had come to found it. From the crowd of disciples who followed him, He selected, after a night of prayer, twelve men whom He named apostles, ‘ St. Matt. iii. 13 to end.

i8a The Faith of the Church.

and whom He trained to become the first ministers of his Church. As time went on, He gave them the solemn commission and the authority to act as his witnesses and the in struments for the salvation of the world. Our Lord’s ministry lasted three years, and during its course He journeyed through the land of Palestine, preaching the gospel, teaching the people, working miracles of healing, and attract ing souls to himself day by day. Thus, every step of His way was marked by deeds of wondrous love and tenderest mercy. As Mr. Keble so beautifully says, — ” All his time, from his baptism to his crucifixion, was entirely spent in waiting on those who needed him, either for their sorrows or for their sins.” His work stirred the envy of the chief priests, the Scribes and the Pharisees, who composed the religious world of the day; and they did not rest until they had silenced him, as they thought, by the death of the cross.

Shortly before his last journey to Jerusalem, Jesus permitted Peter, James, and John, three of his apostles, to witness his transfiguration. Ascending a mountain, the divine glory burst forth from him, and Moses and Elijah, the two chiefest prophets of the old law, spake with him of his coming death and sufferings, while the eternal Father again testified with audible voice, — “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

By his earthly career Jesus Christ proved that He was the incarnate Son of God, the Saviour of mankind, in fulfilling prophecies, in working miracles, and in giving in his doctrine and in his life the rule and the model of all virtues.

5. The Passion of our Lord.

” Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried.”

The mystery of the Redemption specially demands our reverent attention. By this we understand the sufferings and the death of our blessed Lord, whereby He redeemed the world.

That the Saviour was to suffer when He came, had been foretold from the beginning. The first sin of man drew from God the merci ful promise of the Deliverer, ” the seed of the woman.” It was promised that He should come to ” bruise the serpent’s head,” i.e., to destroy the power of Satan; but it was added, that in so doing the serpent should “bruise his heel,” i.e., inflict suffering upon him in his humanity.1 As time went on, this truth was taught again and again both by word and deed, — by type and prophecy. The system of the Mosaic sacrifices taught the solemn lesson that without the shedding of blood, which is the life, there is no remission of sins; 2 and pointed to the shedding of the precious blood of the Lamb of God, who should take away the sins of the world. The prophets, notably Isaiah, foretold that Christ should surfer and die for his people.3

We have seen that it is probable that the Son of God would have been incarnate if there had been no sin for which to atone, but the sufferings of our Lord are clearly traceable to the sin of man. Suffering is the shadow and

1 Gen. iii. 15. * Lev. xvii. 11. Heb. ix. 22, The Man of Sorrows.

“Behold, and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow.” — Lam, i. 12.

the penalty of sin. Thus,.when we see our Lord suffering, we know that, in some mys terious way, He was in contact with sin, and suffering because of sin. He was perfectly sinless, ” holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners; ” x but, as the representative of our guilty race, He allowed himself to be accounted guilty, and in surrendering life in such agonies, He bore the punishment due to our sins. In the striking language of St. Paul, God ” made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin.” 2 Thus, Jesus was the sin-bearer, bearing ” our sins in his own body on the tree.”3 The prophet Isaiah specially declared that ” the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” *

This great prophecy found its first fulfillment in our blessed Lord’s agony and bloody sweat in the garden of Gethsemane, on the night in which He was betrayed. At the close of this terrible conflict, Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve apostles, betrayed his master to his enemies for thirty pieces of silver. Deserted by the apostles, Jesus was taken away, and, on the next day, was led before his judges, scourged, crowned with thorns, and, after enduring unspeakable insults and in dignities, was sentenced by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, to be nailed to a cross upon which He died. All this happened upon the first Good Friday.

The crucifixion of Jesus is the most terrible crime which it is possible to conceive; for the crucified was none other than God the Son, the Second person in the blessed Trinity, the Creator and the Judge of all men.

3 i St. Peter ii. 24. 4 Isa. liii. 6.

The Crucifixion.

SCD SO LOVED THE WORLD.

Our blessed Saviour was nailed to the cross at nine o’clock in the morning; at twelve o’clock a mysterious darkness fell upon the face of nature, which lasted until three o’clock, when He died. During the six hours He hung upon the cross, He uttered seven sayings, known as the seven words from the cross: —

1. Jesus prayed for his murderers in the words, — ” Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”

2. He pardoned the penitent thief who was crucified with him, saying, — ” To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

3. He commended his blessed mother to the care of the apostle St. John, — ” Woman, behold thy son!… Behold thy mother! “

4. Forsaken by God, He uttered the awful cry, — “My God, my God, why hast thou for saken me? “

5. He said,—” I thirst.”

6. He spoke of the completion of his redemp tive work, saying, ” It is finished.”

7. In the moment of death, He yielded up his soul into his Father’s keeping with the words, — ” Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.”

The death of Jesus was the parting of his soul from his body; but neither soul nor body, thus sundered, were for one moment separated from his Godhead. His death was not of necessity as in our case, but by his own will.

By his cross and passion our incarnate Lord wrought the great atonement,1 — the reconcili ation of man to God: He redeemed us from the power of Satan, from sin, and from the punish-

1 88 The Faith of the Church.

ment of sin. He did this as God and man in one person. As man, He suffered death for us; as God, He gave an infinite value to his sufferings and death. We must not regard the Redemption as the offering of so much pain for so much sin. It is not so much the painfulness of our Lord’s sufferings which gave them their value, as the obedience of which they were the evidence. As St. Bernard says, ” It was not his death, but his freely dying, which was pleasing to God.” The sufferings and death of Jesus were the witness to his perfect obedience to the will of God. He satisfied to the full the righteous demands of God on the obedience of man. His obedience knew no limits, for He ” became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” x We cannot conceive of obedience going beyond such an offering.

We should always think of this perfect obedience of our incarnate Lord, as the great cause of our redemption. In this wondrous act of God’s love, we should regard our Lord not merely as our substitute, though He was also this, but as our representative. As the human race fell in Adam, so it was restored in Christ, the Second Adam, the son of man, the repre sentative man. And as the human race fell from God through disobedience, so it could only be restored by obedience. This obedience to the will of God, Jesus rendered all through life; but it reached its highest perfection in his death and passion. Our Lord revealed the habit of his life when He said, — ” My meat is to do the will of him that sent me,” and, ” I do always those things that please him.”2

The cross and passion of our Lord is the medium of a great revelation: it reveals, —

i.. The malice and deadly impiety of sin; shewing what all sin leads to, and what alone can expiate it, — the death of Christ, the Son of God.

ii. God’s hatred of sin; teaching that God’s attitude toward sin is one of detestation and wrath. If He underwent such shame and pain to destroy sin, how He must hate sin!

iii. God’s love to sinners; if He willed to die to save sinners, how He must love sinners!

“O love of God! O sin of man! • In this dread act your strength is tried; And victory remains with love; For He, our love, is crucified! “

F. W. FABER.

6. The Descent into Hell. ” He descended into Hell.”

At three o’clock on Good Friday our blessed Saviour died on the cross, and from this time until the morning of Easte’r-day, a period of some forty hours, his soul remained separated from his body. It was during this interval that the soul of Jesus ” descended into hell.” The word hell in the Creed, signifies ‘ the under world,’ or ‘ the unseen world.’ It does not mean the place of torment reserved for the devil and his angels, but the abode of departed spirits, of which our Lord had spoken to the penitent thief under the name of ” paradise.”

i go The Faith of the Church.

From the death of Abel until the time of our Lord’s passion, great numbers of souls had passed out of this life into the unseen world. These disembodied souls were in a place of safe-keeping in what is known as ‘the inter mediate state,’ by which we understand the state of the departed between death and the last judgment. St. Peter describes some of these souls as “the spirits in prison,” and declares that our Lord visited the realms of the dead after his passion, in order that He might announce to them the glad tidings of his victory over Satan.1

Our Lord’s descent into hell is a subject about which little can be said with certainty. As to what actually took place there at his coming, we do not know. We may believe that some special blessing to the departed resulted from his presence at such a time, but we have no means of knowing any details.

Connected with our Lord’s descent into hell is a subject of some importance, of which we will now speak. We refer to the condition of the departed in the intermediate state.

Holy Scripture seems to imply that at death the soul goes before God for the particular judg ment, and is then consigned to a place of joy or misery in the intermediate state. This joy is not the final joy of heaven, neither is this misery that of everlasting punishment. This particular judg ment is to be distinguished from the final or general judgment. The general judgment is represented as a vast assize at which all the world will be assembled, and which will not take place until after the resurrection at the 1 I St. Pet. iii. 19; iv. 6.

The Faith of the Church. 19*

end of the world; hence it is called “the last judgment.” Our Lord himself so describes it in St. Matt. xxv. 31, 32, — “When the Son of Man shall come in his glory… before him shall be gathered all nations: and He shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats.” Upon the general judgment at the end of the world, the condition of souls in eternity depends. No one, however good he has been, will receive his final degree of bliss immediately after death; and na one, however bad he has been, will then receive his final measure of rejection. All souls, good and bad alike, go at death to a place of waiting, where we believe they receive a foretaste, though not the actual realization, of their final lot in eternity. This we may conclude from the teach ing of our Lord in the parable of the rich man and the beggar, which is recorded in St. Luke xvi. 19, etc. Our Lord is describing the state of two souls in the interval between death and the judgment. That He is not speaking of heaven or hell is evident. The Greek word translated “hell” in the sentence, “And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments,” is ” hades,” and is never used in Holy Scripture for the place of everlasting punishment. The rich man’s allusion to his five brethren still living upon earth, also shows that the time spoken of is that previous to the resurrection and the general judgment. It is not until after these events that men will reach their final state in eternity.

As far as the souls of the saved are con cerned, we may regard the intermediate state as a preparation for the life of heaven. We

1 92 The Faith of the Church.

may believe that purification from the stains of sin committed in this life, forms a necessary part of such preparation. Dr. Pusey thought that ” amid the rest and felicity of knowing that they are saved, that ‘they cannot again have the very faintest wish to commit the very slightest sin… the temporary banish ment from the sight of God will be intense purifying suffering.” 1

No one, however good a life he may have lived on earth, is fitted at once to come into that glorious Presence. ‘ There are stains and imperfections still clinging to the souls of the very best men, which must needs be purged and done away, before the full sight of God can be endured, and his presence be enjoyed. There is a legend of the middle ages which teaches a great truth. A certain bishop had some ill-will toward a city which had rejected his authority. He saw in a vision an empty throne in the next world intended for himself. On advancing to occupy this throne he was motioned back, being told that he was not then fit to occupy it. Turning his eyes within, he saw a black spot on his soul. It was the grudge he bore toward the city which had despised his authority.2

In the time of waiting between death and the last judgment, the final preparation for God’s presence is made. When we reflect upon what we really are, and what God is, and how much of the ways of heaven we have yet to learn, we

^ What is of Faith as to Everlasting Punishment? 3rd Edition, p. 119.

cannot but heartily thank God that He has pro vided such an interval, in which the work of grace begun on earth may be continued and perfected. Speaking of the saintly John Keble, Dr. Pusey wrote,—” It would be expected of such a humble soul as that of the author of The Christian Year, that the prospect of such a preparation was an unspeakable comfort to him within a year of his death. He expressed it both to myself and others.” x

Our thoughts of the departed who in this life sought to obey God and to keep themselves pure and true, can only be those of unspeakable rest in Christ.2 It has moreover been widely believed in the Church, that the more exalted of the faithful departed, though they have not yet attained to their perfect consummation and bliss, are even now brought into close association with our Lord in his heavenly glory and mediation. 3

For the many who depart this life apparently neither good enough for heaven nor bad enough for hell, we may hope that a place of mercy is provided in the intermediate state, in which the evil will be completely purged, and the good per fectly developed. It is reasonable to suppose that when this purification is accomplished, such souls will enter into perfect peace, and advance toward that final and unending happi ness which will follow the resurrection of the body and the last judgment.

s The opinion that the souls of the martyrs entered heaven immediately after death has been generally held in the Church.

‘Every heresy is the intellectual vengeance of some suppressed truth.’ This is so of forget fulness of the truth of which we are thinking. Such forgetfulness has led to the gravest conse quences. Unmindful of the merciful provision of a place of preparation between death and the judgment, men have come to deny the existence of hell. Instinctively feeling that so many souls leave this life unfitted for heaven, and ignorant of the truth of the intermediate state, they have naturally rebelled against the thought of such souls being eternally lost. Thus, with no other alternative before the mind, they have been led to deny that there is any hell at all. A belief in the true doctrine of the intermediate state would have saved them from their error.

Again and again we see that the abuse of a thing is fatal to its right use. It is one of the unhappy results of exaggerated teaching that in the re-action against that which is false, that which is true is lost sight of. And such is the case in regard to the intermediate state. At the time of the Reformation, serious errors and abuses widely prevailed concerning the condition of the departed. To some of these we have already alluded in speaking of the sale of indulgences (pp. 89, 90). It is against such errors and abuses that the Church of England protests in Article XXII. This article is not meant to condemn the primitive doctrine of the inter mediate state as we have stated it, but only ‘the Romish doctrine,’ which so largely obtained at the time of which we are speaking, and which could claim no support from the teaching of antiquity. The term purgatory simply means ‘ a

place or process of cleansing or purging; ‘ it is disused among us because of certain ideas which in medieval times had attached them selves to the word. Of these we have already spoken in discussing the causes of the Refor mation.

The subject of prayer for the departed will be treated of later in this book (see pp. 224226, 272).

“The third day He rose again from the dead.”

The lifeless body of our Saviour was taken down from the cross on the evening of Good Friday by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, two of his disciples. The first of these was a rich man who owned a garden in which he had prepared for himself a tomb, hewn out of the rock. To this unused sepulchre, the sacred body of our Lord was carried. Before being laid to rest, the lifeless form had been wound in the long linen bandages used by the Jews in burial, in the folds of which spices, to the weight of a hundred pounds, had been placed for the preservation of the body. The head of our Lord was also wrapped round with a napkin, leaving the lower part of the face and the neck uncovered. It is important to notice these arrangements, in regard to what afterwards happened. Placing the sacred body of the Lord in the cave, the two disciples rolled a great stone to the opening, and departed.

The Resurrection.

‘* Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.”— I Cor. xv. 21.

The chief priests, with Pilate’s permission, took the precaution of setting a seal, probably of clay, upon the stone, thus making it impossible for the body to be disturbed or removed, without leaving traces in the broken seal. A guard of Roman soldiers was also granted them to watch by the tomb. The reason given for this special care was, to. use their own words, ” lest his discipler come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead.” T But all such precautions were in vain. Devised by our Lord’s enemies, they became, in God’s providence, important evidences to the truth of the Resurrection.

Very early in the morning of the third day after the Crucifixion, the soul of Jesus returned from the realms of the dead, and re-entered the lifeless body within the cave. Thus was fulfilled the prophecy of David, “Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell; neither shalt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption.” 2 The sacred body thus brought to life, passed out of the folds of the winding-clothes and the napkin, and through the rock, into the outer world. Unseen by mortal eyes, the Lord rose glorious from the dead.

The holy women, who had followed Jesus in the days of his ministry, came at sunrise to visit the tomb, intending to complete the embalming of the body. As they drew near, the question arose, ” Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away.”3 It had been rolled away not to

1 St. Matt, xxvii. 64. ” Ps. xvi. It.

s St. Mark xvi. 2, etc.

permit our Lord to come forth, — He had al ready done so before the stone was removed, — but to enable the holy women to see into the empty sepulchre. Instead of finding, as they expected, the lifeless form lying wrapped in the grave-clothes, they beheld an angel who said ” Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was cruci fied: He is risen: He is not here: behold the place where they laid him.” * Hurrying away in utter astonishment, the women carried the news to the apostles. St. Peter and St. John at once set off to see for themselves; arriving at the tomb, they looked in, and beheld the grave-clothes lying as an empty envelope, which, without being unrolled, had collapsed with the weight of the spices, after the body had been withdrawn, and the napkin in the form of an empty helmet lying a little apart, the distance from the shoulders to the lower part of the face of the dead.2

This was not the first time that the dead had come back to life, many cases of resurrection being recorded in the Bible; but our Lord’s rising again to life differed from all such. These risings to life were in every instance brought about by the power of another, and the person thus raised died again. But Jesus Christ rose from the dead by his own power, through his Spirit, and never to die again. His own words are, — ” I have power to lay down (my life), and I have power to take it again,” 3 and, “I am He that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.” 4

1 St. Mark xvi. 6. » See St. John xx. 3, etc.

s Ibid. x. 1 8. * Rev. i. 18.

The Resurrection of our Lord is better attested than any other fact in history.1 He was seen alive eight times after He rose again by his most intimate friends, who could not be deceived, — on one occasion by above five hundred persons at once.8 One of the apostles, St. Thomas, refused to believe that his Master was risen, and was only convinced by seeing the very woundmarks on his sacred body.3

The Resurrection is the central truth of Christianity. ” If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain.”4 Our Lord’s rising again to life is the proof of the truth of all He taught, and of his claim to be the incarnate Son of God. He himself gave this test in saying, — ” Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up,… He spake of the temple of his body,”5 and alluded to his death and resurrection. It is on this account that we find the Resurrection of Jesus the great topic of the preaching of the apostles.

1 ” The evidence of our Lord’s life and death and resurrec tion may be, and often has been, shown to be satisfactory; it is good according to the common rules for distinguishing good evidence from bad. Thousands and thousands of persons have gone through it piece by piece, as carefully as ever judge summed up upon a most important cause. I have myself done it many times over, not to persuade others but to satisfy myself. I have been used for many years to study the history of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them; and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God has given us, that Christ died and rose again from the dead.” — Arnold, Rugby Sermons, p. 14.

• i Cor. xv. 6. 3 See St. John xx. 24-30.

2OO The Faith of the Church.

8. The Great Forty Days.

Jesus Christ rose from the dead on Easterday, but He did not at once go up to heaven: for a period of forty days He tarried on earth. We know these days in the Church as ‘the great forty days.’ What was the purpose of this delay?

•We reply, That He might give to all a thorough conviction that his rising from the dead was a real event. The Resurrection is the great proof that Jesus Christ is the Son of God made man, and that all He claimed to be and to teach is true. It is necessary for our faith that we should be perfectly sure that He really did come to life again after his passion. He therefore made the fact quite plain by many acts and words, — talking, walking, and eating with his disciples, shewing them his wounded hands, feet and side. In this way, a number of reliable witnesses were trained to go forth into the world and say, — We know that He rose from the grave, for we saw him alive as certainly as we see you alive. In the early days of the Church, one of the chief works of the apostles and disciples was to bear witness to the Resur rection of Jesus. Thus St. Luke tells us that ” He shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs,” i.e., proofs about which there could be no mistake, ” being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.”1

He thus stayed below not only to make his followers sure of the truth of his rising from the dead, but also that He might speak with them * Acts L 3.

concerning ” the kingdom of God; ” i.e., the Church. During the great forty days there were many matters connected with the working of the Church to be arranged. He had not given his last instructions. From the Gospels we learn much about the Church, but from the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles we learn more. The Acts of the Apostles forms the first Church history, and therein we read of things being done of which no record is found in the Gospels: for example, — the first day of the week, or Sunday, is observed instead of the seventh day, or the Sabbath; the sacrament of Confirmation is ministered; the threefold ministry begins to take shape. Of these things we read in the Acts and in the Epistles, without any record of their institution by Christ. There can be little doubt that the ordering of such matters was among “the things pertaining to the kingdom of God,” of which Jesus Christ spake to his disciples during the great forty days.

During this time our Lord was going in and out among his disciples in his risen body. His body, after the Resurrection, possessed mysterious properties which it did not possess before. As we have seen, He passed out of the grave-clothes and through the walls which hemmed him in, without those clothes being unwound, or the great stone being moved from the door of the sepulchre. He appeared to Mary Magdalene, but she supposed him to be the gardener, so strangely was He altered.1 He appeared to two of his disciples ” in another form” as they journeyed to Emmaus, and it was only as He vanished out of their sight that 1 St. John xx. 14.

they recognized him.1 He suddenly appeared in the room in which the apostles were sitting with barred doors, without those doors being opened.2 It was on the occasion of this appear ance, that Jesus gave to all the apostles the power of forgiving sins in his name,3 which He had previously promised to St. Peter at Csesarea Philippi.4 He was the same, yet not the same, for He was clothed in the spiritual body of the Resurrection. ‘Such were the signs of the marvelous properties of his risen body, in which, to crown all, at the appointed time He ascended into heaven.

9. The Ascension. 11 He ascended into Heaven.”

During the great forty days our Lord mani fested himself to the apostles from time to time. He did not abide with them constantly as before, but only came to them at intervals, and for brief periods. There was much uncertainty about his presence: his appearances and his disappearances were alike startling. Before his death He taught the disciples that the time would come when He would leave them in bodily presence. He had said, — ” It is ex pedient for you that I go away.”5 “A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.”6 ” I leave the world, and go to the Father.”?

1 St. Mark xvi. 12. » St. John xx. 19.

a Ibid. 22, 23. * St. Matt. xvi. 18, 19.

* St. John xvi. 7. 6 Ibid. 16. 1 Ibid. 2?

The Ascension.

“He lifted up his hands, and blessed them.” St. Luke xxv. 50.

Previous to leaving the earth in bodily pre sence, our Lord had met the eleven apostles upon a mountain in Galilee, and there He had delivered to them his final charge in the majestic words, ” All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” T And now, on the fortieth day after his resurrection, the time came for his departure from earth to heaven. Taking the eleven disciples with him, He led them for the last time out of Jerusalem, across the brook Kedron, to the summit of Mount Olivet. While stretching out his hands in blessing, He rose slowly from the earth, and ascended higher and higher, until a bright luminous cloud enfolded him, and He was lost to view. ” It came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.” 2

Behind the cloud how wondrous must the scene have been, for the gates of heaven were lifted up, and the holy angels poured forth to conduct their King, returning from his humilia tion, to the highest place of honor at the right hand of the eternal Father! ” He was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.”3 The word ‘sitteth’ in the Creed, speaks of the rest, dominion, and judgeship of our ascended Lord.

1 St. Matt, xxviii. 18, etc., R.V. * St. Luke xxiv. 51. 3 St. Mark xvi. 19.

The Ascension is the completion of the Incar nation. The Son of God took our nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin never to put it off. Hence this article of the Creed teaches us the eternity of the Incarnation. As St. Chrysostom says, — ” He shall for ever inhabit this tabernacle. He has put on our flesh, not as if to lay it aside again, but to have it ever with himself.” He is still Son of Man, and will be for ever and ever. The truth of the eternal manhood of Jesus is one of supreme importance, for it has much to do with our salvation.

By his ascension our blessed Lord opened the gates of heaven, which, since the fall, had been closed to man. Our Lord was the first of the human race to enter heaven. He ascended into heaven that we might follow Him; thus, He is described as ” the forerunner,” T entering in for us. A forerunner is one who goes in front, that others may follow. He tells us that He went to heaven ” to prepare a place for us.”2

The great type of our ascended Lord in his work in heaven, is found in the action of the Jewish high priest on the day of atonement. After offering sacrifice for the sins of the people, he took the blood of the victim, and, passing through the Holy Place, entered alone into the Holy of Holies, the very presence-chamber of God, and there presented the blood, sprinkling it before the mercy-seat. This solemn action of the high priest on the day of atonement forms the groundwork of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The writer of that Epistle brings out most clearly the truth that our ascended Lord is the true high priest, and that He has entered * Heb. vi. 20. » St. John xiv. 2.

into heaven itself, there to present his sacrifice, and ” to appear in the presence of God for us.”1

The action of the high priesthood of our Lord in offering himself in heaven, is the Second part of his sacrifice. He is represented in the Reve lation of St. John, as ” a Lamb as it had been slain/’2 i.e., with the wound-marks upon his sacred form. We know that Jesus bore the prints of the nails and spear in his risen body, and that He carried this body so marked into heaven. It is the work of our Lord as our high priest to plead continually for his Church in the presence of his Father. It would seem that He bears the scars, the tokens of his passion, on his glorified form in heaven, for this very purpose. ” He ever liveth to make intercession for us.”3 It is through his perpetual pleading that the gifts of grace are ours in the Church. As the Head of the Body, our blessed Lord is the medium through which grace descends upon us, his members. ” When He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.”4

Every time we pray ‘ through Jesus Christ our Lord,’ or beg for mercy and help for his sake, we throw ourselves into the stream of the unceasing pleading of Jesus in the heavens. But beyond prayer, there is a special way in which we may share in the blessings of that heavenly pleading. Before He ascended to exercise his office as our great high priest, He’ ordained a great mystical service in which we, on earth, may have a real part in that which He does above. Jesus Christ is now pleading

1 Heb. ix. 24. » Rev. v. 6.

3 Heb. vii. 25. * Eph. iv. 8.

the merits of his life and death before the face of the eternal Father, and He has given us the means of doing the same on earth. This service is the Holy Eucharist. In the Holy Eucharist we show forth Christ’s life and death before God below, as He pleads the same before the Throne above. The Eucharistic Sacrifice is the earthly counterpart of the heavenly pleading, as it is also of the worship of the ” Lamb as it had been slain.”1 Thus the worship of heaven and earth are one.

10. The Return to Judgment.

” From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.”

The Second coming of our Lord, which is the hope of his Church, will differ in many ways from his first coming. He came first in great humility, when He did not abhor the Virgin’s womb: his Second coming will be in awful majesty. His first coming was as the Saviour of the world: He will come again to be our Judge. It is in commemoration of these great events, the one in the past, the other in the future, that the Church keeps the season of Advent.

That our Lord will come again is perfectly certain, for He has said so; but the time of his corning is veiled in uncertainty. He who said, ” they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then shall He send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the 1 Rev. v. 6.

uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven,” went on to add, ” But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”1

The purpose of the Second coming of Jesus Christ is stated in the Creed, — ” He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.” By the ex pression ‘ the quick ‘ we are to understand the living, — those who shall be alive on the earth at the Second coming of Jesus Christ. Of such it is written that they “which are alive and remain shall be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” 2

The day of judgment is described as “the day when the Son of Man is revealed.” 3 By this we may understand that before pronouncing sentence, J-esus Christ will first satisfy the assembled universe of his righteous claim to be their Judge, so that friend and foe alike may be convinced of his perfect equity.

The day of judgment will be the day of justice, when all life’s inequalities will be put right, and everyone will get his due. As such St. John speaks of it, — “I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. \nd the sea gave up the dead which were in

1 St. Mark xiii. 26, 27, 32. » I These, iv. 17.

it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.” l The Judge will be none other than our Incarnate Lord himself, ” the Son of Man.” ” The Father hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man.”2 We shall be judged by one who is both God and man. In the divinity of our Lord, we have the assurance that He will judge us fairly; for as God He knows our frailty, our temptations, and our struggles. In the humanity of our Lord, we have the pledge that we shall be judged tenderly; for as man He knows from experience what we are, and what we can do. We shall be judged with God’s perfect justice, and with man’s perfect sympathy. The result of the judgment is separation; the Judge ” shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats,” every soul going to its own place, the place for which it has fitted itself, at the right hand or at the left hand of the Judge. “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world,” — and again, ” Then shall He say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into ever lasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” 3

In speaking of this solemn subject St. Basil wrote, — ” Blessed is that soul, which day and night hath no other care than how, in the great day, when every creature shall stand around the

1 Rev. xx. 11-13. * St. John v. 27.

p

Judge to give an account of their works, she shall be able to relate her life. For whosoever continually places that day and that hour before his eyes, and ever thinks of his defense at that most just tribunal, is likely to commit no sins, or at least very few.” x

iv. ” I believe in the Holy Ghost.”

The Holy Ghost is the third person of the ever blessed Trinity, proceeding from the Father and the Son, and is, with them, worthy of divine honor. We are not to think of the Holy Spirit as a mere influence or quality, but as a person. He dwells within us as the uncreated Source of grace, but the influence and qualities which his presence imparts are to be distinguished from his person, just as the perfume which a flower gives forth is to be distinguished from the flower itself. In many places in the Scrip tures, that is said of the Holy Spirit which can only be said of a person. We are taught that He intercedes for us, that He teaches us, that He strives wifh us, that He convicts us of sin, and that He may be grieved and resisted. All such things can only be said of a person.

The Holy Spirit is not merely a person, but He is a Divine Person. “The Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one substance, majesty, and glory, with the Father and the Son, very and eternal God.”a When the angel Gabriel appeared to the blessed Virgin Mary at Nazareth, he said,—” The Holy Ghost shall come upon these, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow these: therefore

also that holy thing which shall be born of these shall be called the Son of God.” J In the words of St. Ambrose, “We cannot doubt the Spirit to be Creator, whom we admit to be the author of the Lord’s incarnation.” Our blessed Lord taught the divinity of the Holy Spirit, when He declared that ” all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.” 2 He could not have thus spoken, if the Holy Ghost is but a creature, and not God. St. Peter told Ananias that he lied to the Holy Ghost, and that in so doing he had not lied unto men, but unto God.3 St. Paul teaches that the Church is the temple of God, because the Spirit of God indwells her.* Soagain, the Nicene Creed declares the Holy Ghost to be ” the Lord,” i.e., the Lord Jehovah, ” who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified.”

This Creed also bestows upon the Holy Spirit the title of ” the Giver of Life,” i.e., the quickener, or life-giver. In the account of the creation of the world, He is described as ” moving (or brooding) upon the face of the waters.” 5 By the vital energy of the divine Spirit, the works of creation were brought to perfection. As the Life-Giver, the Spirit overshadowed the blessed Virgin Mary, thus enabling her to conceive in her womb the incarnate Lord.6 On the day of Pentecost, the eternal Spirit descended upon the Church to fill her with divine life, and to abide with her for ever. Jesus Christ is ‘ the Life,’ and the Holy Spirit

1 St. Luke i. 35. • St. Matt. xii. 31. ‘ Acts v. 3, 4. 4 i Cor. iii. 16, 17. $ Gen. i. 2. 6 St. Luke i. 34, 35,

.212 The Faith oj the Church.

is ‘ the Life- Giver,’ who applies the work of Christ to our souls in the Church.

The Holy Spirit is said, in the Nicene Creed, to proceed from the Father and the Son. This refers not only to his coming into the world and upon the Church, but also and chiefly to his eternal relation to the Father and the Son. We believe that He is the Spirit of God and of Christ. ” The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, as from one principle of life. As the lake is formed by the water from the river and from the spring, so the blessed Spirit ceaselessly derives his origin from the ‘Godhead of the Father and the Son. He is the ‘ pure river of water of life ‘ which proceedeth ‘out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.’ Our Lord describes the Spirit’s procession from himself, as receiving * of mine,’ not of me, and signifies his immediate union with the Father, when He promises his advent in the words, 1 Whom I will send unto you from the Father.’ ” x

The Holy Spirit inspired the prophets of the Old Testament, and the apostles and the evangelists of the New. By this we mean that He enabled them to select out of the mass of revelation such truths, and to place on record such facts of history, as possessed an abiding value and a lasting interest to mankind; both ^giving them the impulse to do this, and pre serving them from error in fulfilling their task. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit fixed and safe-guarded revelation. For further information •on the subject of inspiration, the reader is referred to pages 335-338-

The Faith of the Church. 213.

v. “The Holy Catholic Church.” i. The Holy Ghost in the Church.

The mention of the Holy Ghost in the Creed is followed at once by that of the Holy Catholic Church. We pass quite naturally from belief in the Holy Spirit to belief in the Church, for the Church is the temple of the Holy Ghost.

It is a fact of deep significance that the Christian Church did not commence its proper work in the world during the lifetime of Jesus Christ. Before his ascension Christ founded the Church; He appointed the apostles to be the first officers of the Church, giving them authority to act for him, and instructing them how to act after his departure. But He accom panied this with the command that they were not to exercise their office until sometime in the future. His last charge was, ” Tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.” ‘

It was not until ten days after Christ went up to heaven, that the great event happened which gave the Christian Church its real start in the world. That event was the descent of God the Holy Ghost upon the Church on the day of Pentecost, the first Whitsunday, re corded in the Second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. That the Holy Ghost should thus come, had been foretold by the prophet Joel in the words, ” And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh.” a Before Christ went up, He had chosen the first ministers of his Church. He had charged them to teach, to baptize, to absolve, and to celebrate 1 St. Luke xxiv. 49. ‘ 7o-l ii *8.

the Holy Eucharist; yet at first they did none of these things, — they waited.

For what did they wait? They waited for the fulfillment of Christ’s own promise; for that power which was to come upon them from on high. They waited for the coming of the Holy Ghost, the Life-Giver.1

Between Ascension-day and Whitsunday there is no record of the apostles performing any ministerial actions. They neither taught, bap tized, confirmed, nor celebrated the Holy Eucha rist.8 All was in a state of suspense, until the promised power should be theirs which should enable them to do all that Christ had bidden them. They were as soldiers who had received their orders, but were waiting for their arms. Before Pentecost, the Church was as ” the dry bones” spoken of by EzekieM brought indeed together, but motionless, awaiting the breath from on high.

After the descent of the Holy Ghost all this was changed. Suspense was at an end. The apostles at once began to carry out all the in structions which Christ had given them. We read of their going forth immediately to labor in all places, teaching, baptizing, confirming, celebrating the Holy Eucharist, and ordaining others. From all this we learn that the coming of the Holy Ghost upon the Church was an event of the greatest importance.

We must not think that the Holy Spirit came

a The Sacraments ordinarily depend for their validity upon the operation of the Holy Ghost, who was not given until Jesus was glorified, — a process which seems to have taken ten days to accomplish (St. John vii. 39. Acts i. 4, 5).

» chap, xxxvii.

only to give the Church its start in the world, and then, when this was accomplished, withdrew his presence. He came to be the Church’s per petual endowment throughout all time. Our Lord expressly promised that the Holy Spirit should come upon his Church never to leave it. He promised the Holy Spirit’s presence as an abiding possession. He said, ” I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever; even the Spirit of truth.”1 The Holy Catholic Church is, by divine appointment, the perpetual abode and permanent home of the Holy Spirit of God.

2. The Office of the Church.

The Church, the Body of Christ, is a divine society spread throughout the world, established by Jesus Christ, and of which He is the head and the baptized are the members. The Church is subject to the authority of lawful pastors, the bishops whom Christ charges to instruct, to feed, and to govern her members. Under the bishops, as fellow-workers, are the priests and the deacons. The Church teaches to the faithful the truth which Christ delivered to the apostles, and she ministers the grace which flows from his sacred humanity, by means of the sacraments.

The first part of the Creed, and by far the larger part, concerns our belief in God. We are taught about God himself, and what He is to us. We are taught that in the one God are three persons, — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We are taught to believe in 1 St. John xiv. 16- “»

God the Father as the Creator, in God the Son as the Redeemer, in God the Holy Ghost as the Sanctifier. From the opening words ” I believe in God,” down to the words ” I believe in the Holy Ghost,” the subject of the Creed is God. If we look on to the end of the Creed we come to the words, ” the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life ever lasting.” These are matters in which man is chiefly concerned. The forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting, are the three great blessings of the Gospel, for which all men hope. In the Apostles’ Creed, the expression “the Holy Catholic Church,” stands between the words concerning God, and those concerning man.

Now the structure of the Creed teaches that we may not go straight from belief in the three persons of the Holy Trinity, to belief in the three main blessings of the Gospel, until we have expressed our belief in the Holy Catholic Church. We do not pass from our belief in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, to belief in the blessings of the Gospel, until we have said, ” I believe in the Holy Catholic Church.” The position of the words ” the Holy Catholic Church,” in the Creed teaches an important truth, viz., that it is God’s will to bestow the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting, in and through the Holy Catholic Church.

It must not be thought that God deserts all

those who are outside his Church. Christ is

” the true Light, which lighteth every man that

cometh into the world.” x ” The Spirit breatheth

2i8 The Faith of the Church.

where He listeth. All life is his in nature and in man. There is no being which lies outside the action of the eternal Word or his Spirit.” x While it is true that God’s grace overflows the Church, yet the fact remains that it is pledged to us only within that sphere. God’s grace is not bound, but we are bound to seek it where He has promised it, that is, in the Church. The Church is the circle wherein God chiefly works. Within the Church, definite graces are pledged and guaranteed by the divine fidelity. Within the Church, the faithful Christian lives and moves in the region of assured grace. There is no covenanted security outside the Church.

This important truth is revealed by God in the New Testament, and it is taught by the position which the phrase ” the Holy Catholic Church,” occupies in the Apostles’ Creed.

3. The Notes of the Church.

From the Creeds we learn that the Church possesses four notes, or distinguishing marks. The Church is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apos tolic.

THE CHURCH is ONE, for there is none other, and because the faithful who form the Church are united to one head, even Jesus Christ, by the same sacraments. They hold the same faith, and are subject to the same authority exercised by the bishops, who represent Christ. The unity of the Church is mainly an internal unity, which ought to show itself in an external unity. Through the sin of man this external unity has been broken.

THE CHURCH is HOLY. The source of the Church’s holiness, is the indwelling presence of the Holy Ghost, who sanctifies her members by uniting them to Christ the head. The Church offers to her members grace and truth as the means of sanctification, and is the home where saints are nurtured and formed.

THE CHURCH is CATHOLIC, “because it is throughout the world, from one end of the earth to the other; and because it teaches universally and completely one and all the doctrines which ought to come to men’s knowledge, concerning things both visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly: and because it subjugates in order to godliness every class of men, governors and governed, learned and unlearned; and because it universally treats and heals every sort of sins, which are committed by soul and body, and possesses in itself every form of virtue which is named, both in deeds and words, and in every kind of spiritual gifts.” J

The word catholic means ‘ universal,’ while the word protestant means ‘ making a protest.’ * Protestant ‘ is a negative term, and does not express positive belief of any kind. It is a mistake for a churchman to describe himself as ‘ a protestant,’ for the term is nowhere to be found either in the Bible or in the Prayer Book, and ought not to be adopted as a desig nation of the Church or her members.*

2 It is true that the term ‘ protestant ‘ occurs in the oath in the Coronation Service; but this oath is imposed on the sole authority of Parliament, not of the Church; and the term, as there used, is simply a popular expression exclud ing all Roman authority, and nothing more.

22O The Faith of the Church.

THE CHURCH is APOSTOLIC, because she can trace her origin to the apostles of Christ, and is governed by their successors, and believes, preserves, and teaches the apostles’ doctrine.

It is a matter of deepest regret that not one of the four notes of the Church is now, or ever has been, universally realized. Her unity is marred by grievous divisions, her whole history shews an imperfectly attained sanctity, the greater part of the world still lies outside her fold, her discipline has never been fully accepted or faithfully exercised. Yet these * notes ‘ form the hope of the Church, and when she attains to their full measure, she will be presented as the bride to the heavenly bridegroom ” a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing.”1

vi. “The Communion of Saints.”

By the term communion in this article of the Creed, we are to understand * fellowship.’ This fellowship of saints is grounded on the truth that all the saints, living and departed, are united to Jesus Christ, and form his mystical body. The saints are members one of another, because they are members of Christ’s body, the Holy Catholic Church. ” So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.” 2

The term saints, or * holy ones,’ is applied in

the New Testament to all the baptized living

upon earth, who have not forfeited baptismal

grace. The baptized are saints in the sense The Communion of Saints.

“Ye are come unto mount Sion, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to JESUS the Mediator of the new covenant.”

(This illustration, from the Altar-piece of St. John’s Church, the Isle of Dogs, is reproduced by kind permission of Messrs. John Hardman & Co.)

that they have been sanctified by baptism, and are called to lead a holy life. As fellow-members of the body of Christ, they hold the same faith, receive the same sacraments, join in the same worship, and share in common its blessings and its hopes.

But in later use, and according to modern custom, the term < saints ‘ is applied to the more distinguished members of the Church, and es pecially to such as have departed this life, and are now with Christ. The Church has thus specially honored the blessed Virgin, the apostles, and the martyrs, and other great leaders in the army of the faithful. These may be regarded now as among ” the spirits of just men made perfect,”1 and certain of their number we keep in honor, and commemorate on saints* days. Such are described in the collect for All Saints’ day as the ” blessed saints.” This same communion also embraces the less prominent servants of Christ, who have departed this life in his faith and fear. The article of the Creed teaches that we are in close relation to all these holy ones beyond the grave, that they remember us before God and pray for us.

The term • saints ‘ is also applied in the Old Testament to the holy angels,2 the first family of God, who minister to all below who are in Christ. The Epistle to the Hebrews 3 speaks of ” an innumerable company of angels,” to whom the redeemed race of mankind ” are come,” and who will hereafter be gathered into a closer union with us in Christ.

Thus the communion of saints embraces the whole family of God, — the glorified saints, the

holy angels, the faithful departed, and the faith ful still on earth.

That the saints who have gone before pray for us, has always been the belief of the Church. We believe that they join in prayer for us on earth with a power which was not theirs while in the flesh, — the mother for her children, the priest for his flock, friend for friend. And it is lawful to ask God to grant us a share in their intercessions. In what way, or to what extent, the saints are conscious of our needs, has not been revealed to us.

The Church of England, in Article XXII., condemns ” the Romish doctrine concerning in vocation of saints,” that is to say, that system of prayer to the saints which led to their being regarded otherwise than as exalted suppliants. Before the Reformation serious abuses had arisen. It was supposed, for instance, that the saints had power with God because of their own merits, and that they were kinder, and had greater sympathy for sinners than Christ our Saviour. Modern Roman books of devotionspeak of the blessed Virgin Mary especially, in a manner which we believe to be quite inconsistent with the honor due to our Lord.

Upon this subject we quote the words of Dr. Pusey, — ” The exclusive address of unseen beings has an obvious tendency at once to fall into a sort of worship; it is too like the mode in which we address almighty God to be any way safe; the exclusive request of their inter cessions is likely at once to constitute them intercessors in a way different from God’s servants on earth, and (which is the great practical evil of these prayers in the Roman

Church) to interfere with the office of the Great Intercessor; ” 1 and again, ” For members of the English Church, who desire the prayers of the departed, it has to him ever seemed safest to express the desire for those prayers to God ‘ of whom and through whom and to whom are all things.’ ” 2

It is quite right to pray for the departed, if we have a good hope that they died in God’s favor; and where no such hope exists, we may surely commend them to his mercy. If we remember that they are still in the place of waiting, it is natural to pray for them. The Jews regularly used such prayers in their public services, and our Lord, who attended those services, must often have joined in them. He in no way rebuked the practice. In St. Paul’s words, — ” the Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day,” 3 we have probably an example of prayer for the departed. The context seems to show that Onesiphorus was dead when St. Paul wrote these words.

The Church has always prayed for the dead. Tertullian writes of one who had lost her husband, — “She prays for his soul, and seeks refreshment for him in the middle place.” * St. Chrysostom says, — ” Let us not then be weary in giving aid to the departed, and of offering prayers for them.”* In the writings of St. Augustine we read that his mother Monica, at the close of her life, ” gave no injunctions concerning such things as these (her burial

3 2 Tim. i. 1 8, compare with verse 16.

4 de Mono ^ amid, x. * Homily on I Cor. 41.8.

arrangements), but desired only that a memorial of her might be made at thine altar.” The allusion here is to prayers for the dead in union with the Eucharistic Sacrifice. St. Augustine adds, — “May she rest, then, in peace together with her husband. And inspire, O Lord my God, my brethren, that so many as shall read these pages, may at thy altar remember thy handmaid Monica, with Patricius.” x

The early forms of service for the Holy Communion are called the Primitive Liturgies. There is not one of these which does not contain prayers for the dead.2 The early liturgies possess an authority Second only to the Holy Scriptures. We append a prayer drawn up from expressions in the Primitive Liturgies, to show the kind of petitions we may safely make to God for the faithful dead.

REMEMBER, O Lord God, the souls of thy servants who have departed this lite in thy faith and fear, whom we remember, or who are forgotten upon earth. Do thou grant unto them, and unto all who rest in Christ, a place of refreshment, of light, and of peace, in thy kingdom, in thy paradise, in the bosom of Abraham, where sorrow, pain and sighing are banished away, and where the light of thy countenance ever shineth.

• ” In every form, from the solemn liturgies which em bodied the belief of the Church’s profoundest thinkers and truest worshippers, to the simple words of hope and love which are traced over the graves of the poor, her voice went up without a doubt or misgiving, in prayers for the souls of the departed.” — Plumptre, The Spirits in Prison, P- 25.

O

With the weighty words of Dr. Pusey we will bring this section to a close. — “Unless there were, in the word of God, an absolute prohibition of prayer for the departed, how should we go on praying for those whom we love until they were out of sight, and then cease on the instant, as if ‘ out of sight, out of mind ‘ were a Christian duty? How should we not rather follow the soul to the eternal throne, with the apostle’s prayer, ‘ the Lord grant that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day ‘? The departed are included in our Eucharistic prayeu, ‘by the merits and death of thy Son Jesus Christ, and through faith in his blood, we and all thy whole Church may obtain re mission of our sins, and all other benefits of his passion.’ That we have for the time no more to do with those who loved us here, and whom we loved, must be false, because it is so contrary to love. It belongs to the Communion of Saints, that they, in the attainment of certain salvation and incapable of a thought other than according to the mind of God and filled with his love, shall pray and long for us, who are still on the stormy sea of this world, our salvation still unsecured; and that we, on our side, should pray for such things, as God in his goodness wills to bestow upon them.” l

vii. ” The Forgiveness of Sins.”

The forgiveness of sins proceeds from the love and mercy of God, and the sacred merits of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Addresses to the Companions of the Love vf Jesus, pp. 1*6, 127.

As we have already seen, the structure of the Creed teaches that the forgiveness of sins is to be obtained in the Holy Catholic Church. St. Augustine says that, ” sins are forgiven in the Church in three ways; in baptism, in prayer, and in the greater humiliation of penance.”1 All sin, actual as well as original, is washed away in baptism. By prayer, St. Augustine refers to the petition in the Our Father, ” Forgive us our trespasses.” By penance, he refers to sacramental confession with a view to gaining absolution. Of each of these modes of obtaining forgiveness we are to read more fully later in this book.

viii. *’ The Resurrection of the Body, and the Life Everlasting.”

The two last articles of the Creed concern the things which come after death.

DEATH is the separation of the soul from the body. We speak of death as * the passing away,* for in death the soul leaves the body as a tenant quitting a house. ” Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.” 2 After death the body turns to dust in the grave, and there sleeps, awaiting the resurrection at the last day. Death is the penalty due to sin, and the price which sooner or later every member of a sinful race must pay. Adam and Eve brought sin into the world, and death followed as a punishment.

“As by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” x

“Each time that death comes among us, it should remind us of the curse of our nature and the just punishment of Our sins; but among Christians, for whom Jesus Christ has overcome death, it ought chiefly to speak to us of his victory, and of the eternal kingdom to which we journey as we leave this life.” a

THE RESURRECTION is the rising again of the body in which the soul was clothed on earth. At the last day the soul will return from the intermediate state, and re-enter the risen body. The body so raised will not be the natural body as it was in this life,s but a new and spiritual body, possessing new powers, and existing under new conditions in a new order of being, and freed from all taint of evil and inclination to sin. The resurrection of the dead will take place through the power of Jesus Christ and of his Spirit. ” Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; “* “He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” 5

The disembodied soul is but part of the com plete man. The resurrection is necessary in order that the whole man, body and soul, may be perfected in eternity. We do good and evil

* Bfssuet, and his Contemporaries, 1877, p. 511.

* i Cor. xv. 37. 4 St. John v. 28.

* Rom. viii. n.

with our bodies as well as with our souls, and “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.” x

JUDGMENT. In the hour of death the soul goes before God for his judgment. Upon this particular judgment, the condition of the soul during the time of waiting, previous to the resurrection of the body, depends.

The general judgment, in the presence of the assembled universe, will follow the resurrection of the dead. The purpose of the Second judg ment appears to be that all may be satisfied as to the justice of the sentence of the Judge, and that the soul’s degree of eternal bliss or woe may be settled.

HELL is the place and penal condition ” pre pared for the devil and his angels.” a Hell was never intended for man, and he can only arrive there through a wilful, deliberate, and continued rejection of God and goodness. St. Bernard has beautifully written, ” What doth God hate or punish except self-will? Let self-will cease, and hell will not be.” We may hold it for a certainty that none will be doomed to such an awful destiny but those of whom our most merciful Saviour must say, — ” They have both seen and hated both me and my Father,” 3 and in this attitude of soul have died, and remain. Hell is the condition of those who are wilfully and finally impenitent.

1 2 Cor. v. 10. a St. Matt. xxv. 41.

a St. John xv. 24.

Faber’s beautiful words concerning those out side the Church may be applied to the lost, — ” I have no profession of faith to make about them, except that God is infinitely merciful to every soul, and that no one ever has been, or ever can be, lost by surprise or trapped in his ignorance; and, as to those who may be lost, I confidently believe that our heavenly Father threw his arms round each created spirit, and looked it full in the face with bright eyes of love, in the darkness of its mortal life, and that of its own deliberate will it would not have him.” ‘

HEAVEN is the place and the blessed condition of unending happiness in the presence of God, and his holy angels and saints. The happiness of heaven consists chiefly in the sight and pos session of God, — the blest will “see the king in his beauty,” and that for ever and ever. It consists also in an endless reunion with all we have loved below, who have died in grace, and in our being perfectly good and holy for ever more. All who depart this life in a right relation to God will be in heaven at last.

To which happiness may God, of his infinite mercy, bring every reader of this book.

THE TEN COMMANDMENT* /^^M^^N

f/\^/ shalt have none other ^^ / and thy SOL,, and thy \^y If y /gods but Me. V / daughter, thy man- \S //-*VII. Thou shalt not make to \/ servant, and thy niaid-\j // >* /thyself any graven image nor V servant- thy cattle, and the\ //;•*• the likeness of any thing that is Y stranger that is within thy gates. \ If f* in heaven above, or in the earth ^o”” ln six days the Lord made beneath, or in the water under the heaven and earth, the sea, and all r\ earth. Thou shalt not bow down that in them is. and rested the •”* to them, nor worship them: for I seventh day: wherefore the Lord (V the Lord thy God am a jealous Messed the seventh day, and 11 *± God, and visit the sins of the hallowed it. 11 \J fathers upon the children, unto V. Honor thv father and thy l\ _1 the third and fourth generation mother; that thy days may be I 1 1 ^^ \ ot” them that hate Me, and show long in the land, which the Lord / \\ t \\ mercy unt° thousands in them thy God giveth these. /(\\U*\ that love Me, and keep My VI. Thou shalt do no murder. /” U^V commandments. lt commit/r \\» \ III. Thou shalt not take the adi.’rerv /2. \\V\ Nameof the Lord,hy God in f’ Tnou shalt not Steal /-^ •^ i I

\\ \X\ hold him guiltless, thattaketh IX. Thou shalt not bear false/Cf/ Vy — ^\ His Name m vain. witness against thy neigh- /f^ J VV AAlV. Remember that thou bour- /^r/t \\VxAkeep holy the Sabbath- X. Thou shalt not covet /C”>// V^ \\day. -Six davs shalt thou thy neighbor’s house, /S^// V^*^ \labor, and do all that thou shalt not covet / V/// Vv ^\ thou hast to do; but thy neighbor’s wife, / V // Vy^ y\the seventh day is nor his servant, nor /J?Q // Vv^)L\ the Sabbath of the his maid, nor / Qj // Vv**v\ Lord thy God. his ox, nor / *//

Xv, O* \ do no man- anything / V\yy N^/*^”^S£’ “^Qfif ^§*frC<^

LORD, HAVE MERCY UPON US, AND WRITE ALL THESE THY LAWS IN OUR HEARTS, WE BESEECH THEE.

Chapter XVI. The Commandments

GOD has endowed man with the great gift of freewill, by the exercise of which he is able to choose good or evil. In order to help man to a right choice, God has given to him the further gift of conscience. Conscience is the inward monitor directing man what to choose, and what to reject. Without conscience, free will would be a most dangerous gift. Conscience, like freewill, is a natural gift, which everyone possesses. But conscience needs educating and enlightening, otherwise it may deceive us. We often see persons acting conscientiously, yet acting wrongly. It is the worl*> of grace and truth to enlighten and direct the conscience, and to strengthen the will to follow its dictates, Truth is the light of God illuminating the con science, and grace is the power of God bracing the will to obey the truth. “

For the enlightenment of conscience, God has inade known his law of right and wrong. We know the law of right and wrong as the moral law. The moral law is contained in the Ten Commandments. There is no wrong of any kind against which the Commandments do not warn us; and there is no duty, either toward

God or toward man, which may not be implied from them.

The Commandments were given on two occa sions by God himself, and each time from a mount. It was on Mount Sinai that He delivered the moral law to Moses to teach to the chosen people. It was in the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus Christ again laid down the divine law, giving it a fuller and wider meaning. The chosen people received the law of God written on two tables of stone. Christians have received the law of love written by the Holy Ghost in their minds and hearts (Heb. viii. 10). Our Lord’s explanation of the Ten Commandments is found in the fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of the Gospel according to St. Matthew.

There are two ways of regarding the Com mandments. They are to be regarded as positive and as negative at the same time; that is to say, each of the commandments enjoins as well as forbids, teaching both what is to be done, and what is not to be done. * Thou shalt dp this,’ implies * Thou shalt not do that; ‘ and ‘* Thou shalt not do this,’ implies ‘Thou shalt do that.’ By this is meant that where a virtue is commanded, the opposite vice is condemned; and where a vice is forbidden, the opposite virtue is enjoined. It is to be observed that although the Com mandments were originally given to a nation, yet each of them is addressed to individuals, — “Thou shalt,” or ” Thou shalt not.” By this we are taught that the keeping of the Com mandments is a personal matter, in which each individual is concerned.

God’s law is not an arbitrary law. It could not have been other than it is, because the distinction which it points out between right and wrong is an eternal distinction, rooted in the being of God himself. The moral law is a reflection of the holy will of God. We are not required to keep the Commandments merely because He bids us, and for no other reason; but there is a just and good cause for what He enjoins, and for what He forbids. The whole law of God by which we are bound, is contained in the principle of love. ” Love is the fulfilling of the law.” l The Commandments are laid down for our good; and the highest good to which we can attain is to love God with all our hearts, and to love our neighbor as ourselves. We show our love to God by keeping his Com mandments. If we break them, we can only come to grievous harm: He has bidden us ” to keep the commandments of the Lord, and his statutes, which I command these this day for THY GOOD.” 2 Our blessed Lord added, — ” If thou wilt enter into life, keep the command ments.” 3 The Ten Commandments form our rule of life, they are as the hedges at the road side, to keep us in the right path of the love of God and man, and to save us from trespassing on forbidden ground. Of the just man it i& written, “The law of his God is in his heart: and his goings shall not slide.4 ” He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father.” *

1 Rom. xiii. 10. * Deut. x. 13.

3 St. Matt. xix. 17. ” ps. xxxvii. 32.

s St. John xiv. 21.

The Ten Commandments treat of:• — 1. Faith. 6. Love.

2. Worship. 7. Purity.

4. Hallowed Time. 9. Truthfulness, 5. Obedience. 10. Contentment.

The Ten Commandments represent man’s duty toward God, and his duty toward his neighbor, as expressed in the Catechism.

Duty toward God.

My duty toward God is to believe in him, to fear him, and to love him with all my heart, with all my mind, with all my soul, and with all my strength; to worship him, to give him thanks, to put my whole trust in him, to call upon him, to honor his holy name and his word, and to serve him truly all the days of my life.

Duty toward man.

My duty toward my Neighbor is to love him as myself, and to do to all men, as I would they should do unto me: To love, honor, and succour my father and mother: To honor and obey the King, and all that are put in authority under him: To submit myself to all my gov ernors, teachers, spiritual pastors and masters: To order myself lowly and reverently to all my betters: To hurt nobody by word nor deed: To be true and just in all my dealing: To bear no malice nor hatred in my heart: To keep my hands from picking and stealing, and my tongue

from evil-speaking, lying, and slandering: To keep my body in temperance, soberness, and chastity: Not to covet nor desire other men’s goods; but to learn and labor truly to get mine own living, and to do my duty in that state of life, unto which it shall please God to call me.

I. SIN.

Sin is Of two kinds, — original and actual. Of the former we have already spoken (see page 162). We will now speak of actual sin. Actual sin is the breaking of the commandments of God. ” Sin,” says St. John, ” is the transgres sion of the law.” * The word transgression signifies the passing the boundary line which •divides right from wrong. The sinner passes •over from the side of God to that of the devil, and so becomes a traitor and a rebel.

St. Augustine says, — ” Sin is something said, or done, or desired in contradiction to the eternal law.” Thus, the commandments may be broken in thought, word, or deed. We should remem ber that sin, to be complete, need not become speech or action; a formed desire, deliberately assented to by the will, constitutes sin. Sin has its root in the will. We may sin by omission as well as by commission, i.e., by not doing the right, as well as by doing the wrong.

Sin darkens the mind, pollutes the heart, weakens the will, and separates us from God. Sin, if persevered in, ends in death. “Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.”2 1 I St. John iii. 4. » St, James i. 15.

Sins may be either venial or deadly. St. John so teaches when he speaks of ” a sin not unto death,” and of “a sin unto death.”1 A venial sin is as the cooling of friendship, a deadly sin is ‘as the breaking of friendship, between the soul and God. Venial sin is more of the nature of infirmity, while in deadly sin there is an clement of wilfulness. The amount of evil-will exercised, is the measure of the greatness of a sin.

Our blessed Redeemer died to win pardon for the sins of all men; but before we can receive his merciful pardon we must repent; and true repentance is godly sorrow, leading to truthful confession, and firm purpose of amendment. Of repentance for sin we shall read in the follow ing chapter (see page 293).

II. A LIST OF SINS AGAINST THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.

i. Allowing love of another to interfere with duty to God. Allowing love of the world, pleasure, or money, to gain possession of the heart. Acting against conscience for the sake of money. Taking an irreligious place for the sake of money. Doing wrong things to please others. Leaving right things undone for fear of man. Resisting good impulses. Following my *own will rather than God’s will. Being ashamed of religion. Preferring my own opinion to the teaching of the Church. Encouraging thoughts of unbelief. Pretending to be religious to gain the good opinion of others. Thinking 1 i St. John v. 1 6.

religion to be troublesome. Sinning lightly, thinking repentance to be easy. Persevering in sin. Delaying to repent. Despairing of God’s mercy. Murmuring against God’s pro vidence. Complaining in affliction. Being unthankful. Being proud. Being guilty of self-seeking. Seeking to be noticed, flattered, or admired. Refusing to own my faults. Being impatient of what humbles me.

ii. Omitting morning or evening prayers. Saying prayers carelessly, thinking of other things. Shortening prayers through not get ting up in time. Neglect of self-examination. Omitting to use confession when I know I need it. Neglecting the reading of the Holy Bible. Neglect of Holy Communion. Re ceiving Holy Communion from an unworthy motive, in a state of unrepented sin, or when out of charity with others. Receiving Holy Communion without due preparation, not dis cerning the Lord’s body and blood..Going to church to see or meet others, to exhibit my dress, or for appearance sake, instead of to worship God. Not joining in the worship with heart and voice. Neglecting acts of reverence in church. Staring about in church. Going to sleep wilfully in church. Talking or whispering unnecessarily during service. Being irreverent in church when no service is going on. Going to places of worship not belonging to the Church. Neglecting to say grace before and after meals.

iii. Cursing. Using foul language. Calling bad names. Using holy words and names lightly.

Quoting Holy Scripture irreverently. Repeat ing riddles or jokes founded on Holy Scripture. Joking on religious subjects. Arguing about religion in an unbecoming spirit. Arguing about religion with unfit persons. Being dis respectful to God’s ministers. Ridiculing others for acts of reverence. Promising to keep a wrong secret. Making rash promises. Taking a false oath. Wilfully keeping back something in confession, or slurring over a sin to avoid the full shame of it.

iv. Not keeping Sunday holy. Not going to church regularly on Sundays. Not taking pains to be present at the Hqly Eucharist on Sundays and Festivals. Neglecting the holy days and fast days of the Church. Breaking holy days by excess of eating, or merrymaking., Failing to practice self-denial on fast days. Working, or causing others to work needlessly on Sunday. Preventing others from going to church. Spending money on Sunday without.good cause. Selling on Sunday. Wasting time. Neglecting opportunities of doing good.

v. Disobedience to those set over me. Want of respect to superiors. Failing in duty to parents, or parish priest. Not helping parents in time of need. Neglecting the advice of parents, or elders. Being unwilling to learn from the clergy what was needful for my soul. Neglecting duties to wife, husband, children, or relations. Being inconsiderate to old people, or children. Being rude, or unkind to others. Neglecting duties, or being harsh to those placed under me. Judging the rich, or those

above me hardly. Breaking the laws of the Church. Breaking the laws of the land.

vi. Murder. Suicide. Wishing I was dead. Hating others. Bearing malice in my heart. Wishing evil to others. Wishing that others were dead. Being angry without a cause. Being quick to take offense. Refusing to be friends with others. Being sullen, hasty, passionate, irritable, or peevish. Impatience with others. Quarrelling with others. Striking others in anger. Speaking ill-naturedly, or spitefully. Abusing others. Being glad to hear evil of others. Making others angry. Making mischief. Not trying to be a peacemaker. Jealousy. Revenge. Threatening others. Giving way to mean petty thoughts of others. Ridiculing old age, or infirmity. Being unsympathizing. Cruelty to animals. Not try ing to stop others from sinning. Leading others into sin by bad example, or advice. Preventing others from doing right by laughing at them, or by advice.

vii. Giving way to impure thoughts. Being curious to enquire into that which is contrary to perfect modesty. Not keeping a guard over my eyes. Listening willingly to immodest con versation. Joining in immodest conversation. Reading the Holy Bible with impure motive. Reading impure books, or immodest accounts in newspapers. Being immodest in manner. Allowing others to be too free with me. Sing ing indelicate songs. Delighting in bad jests. Using words with double meaning. Writing impure words. Going to places where indecent sights are exhibited. Tempting others to

impurity in word, or deed. Secretly doing that which I should be ashamed of others knowing. Going with bad companions. Putting myself in the way of temptation. Committing fornication, adultery, unnatural sins. Eating and drinking too much. Being dainty, luxurious, or self-indulgent. Drunkenness. Laziness. Neglect of cleanliness. Neglect of self-denial. Spending too much time or money on dress. Being vain of my looks.

viii. Stealing. Being dishonest in little things. Not restoring what I have stolen. Giving away what does not belong to me. Receiving stolen goods. Not seeking the owner of lost property. Not returning what I have borrowed. Not being straightforward in money matters. Gambling. Not returning what was given by mistake. Cheating others. Not paying debts. Running into debt without prospect of being able to repay. Obtaining money, or credit under false pretences. Being extravagant. Evading taxes. Not giving God his due in the matter of almsgiving. Being stingy. Hoarding money. Giving insufficient wages. Injuring the property or the good name of others. Not restoring my neigh bour’s good name when I have injured it. Being idle. Undertaking work for which I am unfitted. Taking credit due to others.

ix. Telling lies. Acting lies. Being deceit ful. Making false excuses. Adding to the truth for mine own honor, or to excite in terest. Exaggerating stories in repeating them. Taking from the truth to serve my own

purposes. Not being as good as my word. Laying my faults on others. Allowing others to be accused of my faults without speaking. Breaking promises. Revealing secrets entrusted to me. Gossip. Tale-bearing. Reading other people’s letters. Listening to what was not meant for me to hear. Forgery. Pretending to be worse than I am. Not owning my sins when charged with them. Boasting. Flattery. Speaking ill of others. Taking a delight in pub lishing their faults. Putting an evil meaning on the words and deeds of others. Being sus picious, or distrustful.

x. Discontent. Murmuring. Being fretful. Wishing for that which God has not given me. Envying others their talents, or possessions. Coveting that which belongs to another. Speaking evil of those better off than myself. Not trying to do my best where God has placed me. Allowing myself to be dependent on others for what I ought to do myself. Desiring another’s hurt, or death, so that I may be a gainer by it. Being greedy of praise, notice, advancement, or consideration.

III. THE THREE NOTABLE DUTIES.

The three notable duties are, — PRAYER, FASTING, and ALMSGIVING. They are so named, because they are specially enjoined by Christ our Lord, in the Sermon on the Mount.

” When thou doest thine alms,….” ” When thou prayest,…” “When ye fast,

Dr. Pusey wrote, — ” Fasting, Prayer, and Almsgiving, — that is, denial of self, love of others, and devotion to God, are the three heads under which our Lord brings all Chris tian duties.”

In the practice of these three duties, lies our safety from the three enemies of the soul.

Prayer delivers us from the Devil.

Fasting subdues the Flesh.

Almsgiving loosens the hold of the World.

It is not uncommon for Christians who pray, to omit the kindred duties of fasting and alms giving. This is clearly wrong, for our Blessed Lord has coupled them with prayer; and fasting and almsgiving are the wings of prayer. No Christian who neglects these great duties, is leading a life true to the teaching of Jesus Christ.

Our Lord teaches that, ” men ought always to pray,”1 and the apostle adds, ” pray without ceasing.”2 St. Augustine interprets these com mands to continual prayer, saying, — ” He prays always, who prays at fixed intervals.”

The devout layman should strive to pray thrice a day, however brief the mid-day prayer may be. The priest must pray more frequently. Bishop Andrewes wrote,3 — ” Men, as they are Christians, ought to pray three times a day, as David, ‘ In the evening, and morning, and at

noon-day will I pray, and that instantly:’ x but as they are prophets, and have a special charge, they must pray to God seven times a day, as the same David, ‘ Seven times a day do I praise these.”‘2

The ancient order of these seven times of prayer, termed the Canonical Hours, com memorates, the sufferings of our Lord.

” At mattins bound, at prime reviled,

Condemned to death at tierce, Nailed to the Cross at sextst at nones His blessed side they pierce.

They take him down at vesper-tide,

In grave at compline lay: Who thenceforth bids his Church observe The sevenfold hoursalway.”3

It is from mattins and prime, and from vespers and compline, that the offices of mattins and evensong in the Prayer Book are compiled.

On the subject of prayer, the reader is re ferred to page 303 of this work.

Fasting is literally abstinence from food and drink; but in a secondary sense it includes all forms of self-denial. The object of fasting is that the flesh may be subdued to the spirit; in other words, that the body may become an apt and willing minister of the soul. The purpose

1 Ps. Iv. 18. * Ibid. cxix. 164.

3 Neale. %ss*ys on Liturgiology •, p. 6.

of fasting is not to distress the body,1 but to set free the soul. St. Leo the Great wrote, — “A man has true freedom when his flesh is ruled by the judgment of his mind, and his mind is directed by the government of God.”2

Fasting, or self-denial, aids us in resisting temptation. If we are able to deny ourselves in things lawful, we shall be better able to deny ourselves in things unlawful. St. Leo again said, — ” Our fast does not consist in abstinence from food only, nor is nourishment withheld from the body to any profit unless the mind is recalled from sin, and the tongue restrained from slander.” 3

The Bible again and again lays down the duty of fasting: the Church tells us when to practice it.

” The Bible bids us fast, The Church says now.”

In the Prayer Book, we have a list of Fasts and Days of Abstinence,4 which will be found

1 This we must look to also, that we do not by an im moderate abstinence impair the strength of the body, and so make it idle and unprofitable for good works.” — St. Basil, Constit. Monast. 4.

* “The ancient fasts the Church of England hath not re jected; and, therefore, because she finds a Lent, or solemn fast, before the great festival of Easter, presently after the apostles, universally observed in the Church of God, she re commends the same observation to her sons, in the full number of forty days, to be kept as days of stricter temper ance, and prayer too, by all those whose health and other circumstances will permit them to undertake it. She still observes the fasts of the four seasons, or Ember-weeks. She still recommends the two weekly stations of the primitive Church to the observation of her sons, Wednesday and Fri day, uistinguishing them from other days of the week by the

in the Appendix at page 403. While there is considerable early authority for keeping certain of the fasting days more rigorously than others, there is no English authority for making a distinction between fasting and abstinence. In the writings of our divines, the words ‘ fasting f and * abstinence ‘ are used interchangeably, no hint being given of any such distinction as that which now obtains in the Roman Church.

Fasting before Communion is, as we shall see later on, the custom of the whole Church. (Sec pages 280, etc.)

Almsgiving is the giving of money, goods, or time to the special service of God. The principle upon which almsgiving rests is con tained in the words of David, ” All things come of these, and of thine own have we given these.”1 The practice of giving alms is a recog nition of the sovereignty of God. By making a definite return of our substance to him, we acknowledge that all we have is his.

It was the rule of the Jews to give one tenth of the year’s produce to the service of God. Christians are bound to give alms in a systematic manner, according as God has blessed them. Almsgiving is a great safeguard against ” the love of money (which) is a root of all kinds of evil.” 2

more solemn and penitential office of the Litany. And in the table of the fasts to be observed, all Fridays in the year, except Christmas-day, are expressly mentioned.” — Bishop Bull’s Vindication of the Church of England, xxvi.

1 A Chron. xxix. *+ ” I Tim. vi. 10. R.V.

IV. THE COUNSELS OF PERFECTION.

The Counsels of Perfection are three in num ber, viz., POVERTY, CHASTITY, and OBEDIENCE.

They are termed ‘ counsels ‘ as distinguished from the divine ‘precepts,’ the fulfillment of which is universally necessary to salvation. They are called Counsels of Perfection, because they are the means whereby the highest per fection may be obtained by those who are called to follow Christ in this way. They are of the nature of exceptional sacrifices, and so form the rule, not for the many, but for the few, — for such as are ” able to receive it.” x

In the Counsels of Perfection, Jesus Christ gave the rule of the higher life, founded upon his own most perfect life. Persons may be called to, —

Voluntary POVERTY, in imitation of him who “though He was rich, yet for our sakes became poor,”2 and who had “not where to lay his head,”3 and was among men as ” He that serveth.”*

Voluntary CHASTITY, in imitation of him who was the virgin Son of a virgin Mother, and who lived a life of perfect chastity.

Voluntary OBEDIENCE, in imitation of him who “pleased not himself,”* and who said, — ” I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.”6

i. POVERTY is the giving up of worldly goods, that the person may be free from worldly cares. It is the following of our Lord’s advice to the

1 St. Matt. xix. 12 * 2 Cor. viii. 9.

» St. Matt. viii. 20. •* St. Luke xxii. 27.

* Rom. xv. 3. 6 St. John vi. 38.

The Commandments. 249^

rich young nobleman, — ” If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor,… and come and follow me.” x The apostles embraced this ‘counsel,’ as we learn from the words, ” Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed these.” 2

ii. CHASTITY in the abstaining from marriage, or the continuance in holy widowhood, in the spirit of our Lord’s words, — ” There be eunuchs,, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”3 To this state St. Paul refers in the words, ” He that is un married careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord…. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit.” 4

iii. OBEDIENCE is the voluntary subjection of the will to authority, in humble dependence upon a religious rule recognized as the will of God. It is the closest following of him who ” took upon him the form of a servant,… and humbled himself, and became obedient unto death.” *

It is a wise plan for those whom God callsto embrace the Counsels of Perfection, to associate themselves, for greater support and encouragement, in religious communities, such as the brotherhoods or sisterhoods of the Church. The revival of such communities of devoted men and women among us, is a matter for deep thankfulness.

1 St. Matt. xix. 21. ” Ibid. 27.

s Ibid. 12. ” i Cor. vii. 32, 34.

* Phil. ii. 7, 8-

V. THE THREE THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES.

Of the Three Theological Virtues, St. Paul speaks in i Cor. xiii. 13, “And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” They are called Theo logical Virtues, because God is the object of these virtues. Faith has for its object the truth revealed by God: Hope has for its object the gifts bestowed on us by God: Charity has for its object God himself.

i. FAITH is the gift of God, — the virtue infused into our souls, by which we firmly believe all that God has revealed and made known to us through the Scriptures, as they are interpreted by the Church. Faith rests upon the truthful ness of God.

ii. HOPE is the gift of God, — the virtue by which we expect that God will give us all things which are necessary to bring us to eternal life. Hope rests on the promises, the mercy, and the power of God.

iii. CHARITY is the gift of God, — the virtue by which we love God above all things, because He is infinitely good, and for his sake our neigh bour as ourselves. Charity rests on the infinite goodness of God, and grows by thankfulness for his love. ” We love him, because He first loved us.” *

VI. THE FOUR CARDINAL VIRTUES.

Of the Four Cardinal Virtues — Prudence, Justice, Temperance, and Fortitude — Solomon speaks in Wisdom viii. 7.

1 i St. John iv. 19.

i. PRUDENCE is the virtue of the understand ing, which teaches us what to do, and what to avoid. It chooses right ends, and the best means of attaining them.

ii. JUSTICE is the virtue of the will, by which we render to all their dues, and so regulate all our conduct toward others.

iii. TEMPERANCE is the virtue which enables us to control ourselves. It teaches us to make a right use of our senses and desires, and of all God’s gifts and creatures.

iv. FORTITUDE is the virtue which makes us brave in God’s service, and enables us to over come difficulties in the path of duty.

VII. THE PRECEPTS OF THE CHURCH. (After Bishop Cosin.*)

i. To observe the festivals and holy days appointed.

ii. To keep the fasting days with devotion and abstinence.

iii. To observe the ecclesiastical customs and ceremonies established, and that without frowardness or contradiction.

iv. To repair unto the public service of the Church for Mattins and Evensong, with other holy offices at times appointed, unless there be a just and an unfeigned cause to the contrary.

v. To receive the blessed Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ with frequent devotion, and three times a year at least, of which times

Easter to be always one.1 And for better pre paration thereunto, as occasion is, to disburthen and quit our consciences of those sins that may grieve us, or scruples that may trouble us, to a learned and discreet priest, and from him to receive advice, and the benefit of absolution.

vi. By the ecclesiastical laws of this realm, there be some times of the year wherein mar riages are not usually solemnized; as,

/Advent \ /Eight days after

Sunday the Epiphany. Fromx Septuagesima L -j Eight days after

until Easter..Rogation } VTrinity Sunday.

(]

1 The mind of the Church of England ever was, and is, to have a communion and commemorative sacrifice of Christ’s death every day. — Cosin, Works, v. p. 124.

Chapter XVII. The Sacraments

THE subject of the sacraments is closely connected with that of the Incarnation and the Atonement, the sacraments being the divinely-appointed means through which the benefits of these mysteries are applied to our souls. The Incarnation is the union of God and man in the person of Jesus Christ. This union is extended in his mystical body, the Church, through the sacraments as the means of grace. The sacraments are the divinelyordered channels through which the spiritual forces of the Incarnation reach us.

” We must ever remember, that though Jesus Christ was in nature perfect man, He was not man in exactly the same sense in which any one of us is a man. Though man, He was not, strictly speaking, in the English sense of the word, a man; He was not such as one of us, and one out of a number. He was man because He had our human nature wholly and perfectly, but his Person is not human like ours, but divine. He who was from eternity, continued one and the same, but with an addition. His

incarnation was a ‘ taking of the manhood into God.’ As He had no earthly father, so has He no human personality. He is not a man made God, but God made man.” x Neither the Bible nor the Creeds say that the Son of God was made a man. The Gospel teaches us that “the Word was made flesh,” and the Nicene Creed that He was ” made man.” The dis tinction is great and important. It was not a man, but manhood that the Son of God united to himself in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary. It was not a human person, but human nature that He assumed in the Incarnation.2

When God said, — ” Let us make man in our image, after our likeness,” 3 He was speaking of the whole human race, as well as of the first man. This is clear, for He added, — “and let them have dominion.” This is taught again in Gen. v. 2, where we read, — ” Male and female created He them,… and called their name Adam” It is not, * Let us make a man, and call his name Adam,’ but, ‘ Let us make man, and call their name Adam.’ The creation of man was the creation of a race or series, of which the first man then made was but the beginning. Thus the wLole human family, including ourselves, was in Adam from the very

• “‘The Word,’ saith St. John (i. 14) ‘was made flesh, and dwelt in us.’ The evangelist useth the plural number us for the nature whereof we consist. It pleased not the Word of God to take to himself some one person among men, for then should that one have been advanced and no more. He made not this or that man his habitation, but dwelt in us. The Son of God did not assume a man’s person unto his own, but a man’s nature to his own person ‘* —See Hooker, EccL Polity, v. 52. 3.

» Gen. i. 26.

first. Out of him was taken Eve, ” the mother of all living,” and then gradually the whole human race.

For this reason, when Adam sinned, all man kind sinned in him; when he fell, all fell in him; when he died, all died in him. This is a great truth, and it is plainly taught by St. Paul, who says, — ” By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned…. By one man’s offense death reigned by one…. By the offense of one judgment came upon all men…. By one man’s disobediencemany were made sinners.” x Thus, through the fall of Adam, a fatal spell was cast over all his posterity.

It was to break this spell, and to set us free, that the Son of God became incarnate. He who created the human race at the beginning, came to rescue it from its fallen state. He called himself * the Son of Man,’ not * the son of a man,’ because, through his Virgin-birth, He had no man for his father. He came tobe the Second Adam, the new head of the race through him redeemed. As St. Irenaeus teaches,3 Jesus Christ became the head of man’s race, that in him we might recover the likeness of God, which in Adam we had lost.

” For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” 3 We die, because

“As the principle of death took its rise in one person, and passed on in succession through the whole of human* kind, in like manner the principle of the resurrection-life

we are in Adam, — not only because we sin as he did, but because we inherit his fallen nature. We are made alive in Christ, not only by fol lowing his example, but the rather by being brought into union with his unfallen nature. In breaking the tie which binds us to the first Adam in his fallen state, and by being placed in the ranks of the Second Adam, in this lies our only hope of deliverance from the evil spell which our union with the first Adam has cast over us. We must get out of connection with ” the first man,” into connection with ” the Second man, the Lord from heaven.” I We must destroy the old relationship, and form a new one. We must transfer our allegiance from Adam to Christ. We must break corres pondence with the one, and place ourselves in correspondence with the other. In short, we need to escape from a natural into a super natural state, — the state of grace.

How is this great change to be accomplished, and so mighty a transfer to be wrought? The answer is, — By means of the sacraments, which Christ ordained for this very purpose. Sacra ments are ” effectual signs of grace,” they effect what they signify; by them God “doth work invisibly in us.” a The sacraments lift us out of our natural state, and place us in, and keep us in, a supernatural state, — the state of grace. Hence, the sacraments are commonly called the Means of Grace. The sacraments place us in living union with Jesus Christ, from whose sacred humanity all grace flows. But to reextends from one person to the whole of humanity.” — St. Gregory Nyssen, Great Catechism, xvi.

1 I Cor. xv. 47. » Art. xxv.

ceive the sacraments savingly, the soul must approach them with faith and repentance; for they who receive unworthily, place a bar to the flow and to the reception of grace.

In the early days of the Church, the term sacrament was used in a wider sense than that which we now attach to it. For example, St. Augustine defines a sacrament to be ” a sacred sign,” and speaks of “the sacrament of the Creed, which they ought to believe; the sacra ment of the Lord’s Prayer, how they ought to ask.” Any holy thing of which it could be said, This possesses a hidden power or meaning, was termed a sacrament. But in later times, and by degrees, the term sacrament came to be restricted to seven ordinances. Some of these owe their existence to our Lord’s direct insti tution, as recorded in the Gospels; others to the apostles acting, we may believe, under unrecorded commands of Christ (see Acts i. 3).

The Two Greater Sacraments are named: —

I. HOLY BAPTISM. II. THE HOLY EUCHARIST.

The Five Lesser Sacraments are named: —

i. CONFIRMATION, li. PENANCE, lii. HOLY ORDER, iv. HOLY MATRIMONY. V. UNCTION.

t

Our Lord’s authority can be traced directly for the institution of Holy Baptism, the Holy Eucharist, Penance, and Holy Order. Matri mony, instituted by God from the beginning, was raised by our Lord to a higher dignity; while the expression, “in the name of the Lord,” used by St. James I of Unction, compared with St. Mark vi. 13, points to his authority for this ordinance also. Although there is no record of the institution of Confirmation in the New Testament, yet we have the highest reasons for believing that it was ordered by our Lord him self before his ascension. Confirmation was practiced by the apostles, and in Heb. vi. i, 2, it is declared to be one of ” the principles of the doctrine of Christ.” Moreover, Confirmation conveys the fulness of the gift of the Holy Ghost, which no rite of the Church’s appointing could do, without divine authority.

The sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist claim special attention, for our Lord has given them a peculiar prominence. They are the instruments of INWARD LIFE, according to our Lord’s declaration, that Baptism is A NEW BIRTH, and that in the Eucharist we eat THE LIVING BREAD. They are sometimes called the Sacra ments of the Gospel, because they have their visible sign or ceremony ordained by Christ in the Gospels. On his authority, the Church has ever held them to be ‘ generally necessary to salvation,’ i.e., for all men in general, without exception, where they can possibly be had. On the plain testimony of our Lord, no one can hope for salvation who wilfully neglects to use the divinely-appointed means of receiving it. ‘ v. 14.

The Church of England does not teach that there are two Sacraments only; but that there are ” two only, as generally (or universally) necessary to salvation.” The five lesser Sac raments she also acknowledges, but not as generally necessary to salvation. These lesser Sacraments are not on this account to be set aside as of no importance; for they are, in their degree, visible signs of invisible grace, and form part of the divine plan for our safety and per fection, according to our needs or conditions in life.

NOTE ON THE NUMBER OF THE SACRAMENTS.

” In the earliest ages, Baptism and the Eucharist — the two sacraments most clearly and directly instituted by Christ, and most necessary for all — were classed together. Then Confirmation, long given along with Baptism, was added to the number. Next — as this number of three did not seem to rest on any fixed principle — various writers chose various rites of (the Church and put them together under the common name of sacramenta. At last, theological reflection, just when systematic theology was beginning to be, led Peter Lombard (A.D. 1164) to the conclusion that there were seven rites, with this in common, which separated them from all others — viz., that they were the ordained means of grace. He called them, and them only, sacraments.” — Addis and Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, 4th ed., p. 809.

“As for the number of the sacraments, if they should be considered according to the exact signification of a sacrament — namely, for the visible signs expressly commanded in the New Testament, whereunto is annexed the promise of free forgiveness of our sins, and of our holiness and joining in Christ — there be but two; namely, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. For although Absolution hath the promise of forgiveness of sin, yet by the express word of the New Testament it hath not this promise annexed and tied to the visible sign, which is imposition of hands. For this visible sign — I mean laying on of hands — is not expressly com manded in the New Testament to be used in Absolution, as

the visible signs in Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are: and therefore Absolution is no such sacrament as Baptism and the Communion are. And though the Ordering of Ministers hath this visible sign and promise, yet it lacks the promise of remission of sin, as all other sacraments besides do. There fore neither it, nor any other sacrament else, be such sacraments as Baptism and the Communion are.” — Homily of Common Prayer and Sacraments.

” The proper and certain sacraments of the Christian Church, common to all, or (in the words of our Church) generally necessary to salvation, are but two, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord… The rest we retain, though not under the notion of such proper and general sacraments, — as Confirmation, Ordination, Matrimony, Penitence, and, lastly, the Visitation of, and Prayer for, the Sick.”— Arch bishop Bramhall, Works t i. pp. 55, 56.

” It is none of the doctrine of the Church of England, that there are two sacraments only, but that * two only are generally necessary to salvation.’” — Bishop Jeremy Taylor, Dissuasive., of Traditions > Section iii.

I. HOLY BAPTISM.

In our Lord’s conversation with Nicodemus, recorded in St. John iii., He declared a new birth of water and of the Spirit to be a necessity to entrance into his kingdom. Our Lord re ferred to the sacrament of Baptism, which had been foreshadowed in his own Baptism, and whrch He was about to institute before his ascension in the charge given to the apostles, — ” Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”1

Holy Baptism is the initial act of God upon

the soul, whereby it is transferred from a

natural condition to a state of grace. Hence,

*t is called by Jesus Christ, the New Birth.

THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST.

St. Matt. iii. 13 to end.

He said, — “Verily, verily, I say unto these, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”1 The kingdom of God here named, is the kingdom of the Incarnation, the realm of grace. By Holy Baptism we are incorporated into the mystical body of Christ, for we are “baptized into Christ.”2 In this sacrament, the germ of the new life in Christ is implanted in the soul. ” Baptism doth also now save us.”3 It saves us from the ill effects of our natural descent from the first Adam: it places us in a state or condition in which, if we con tinue, we shall finally be saved.

On this account it is reasonable to baptize infants, for they cannot too soon be transferred from a natural state to a state of grace. To delay baptism, is to give time and opportunity for the old nature to grow, and to gain mastery in the soul.

The effect of Baptism is threefold:

1. It remits all sin, original and actual.

2. It bestows sanctifying grace, and endues

the soul with the heavenly virtues of faith, hope, and charity.

3. It makes the recipient a member of Christ,

the child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven.

The use of water symbolises the process of cleansing, and the word baptism signifies * washing.’ * St. Paul describes Baptism as

1 St. John iii. 5. • Gal. iii. 27. 3 i St. Peter iii. 21.

4 Bede, in his Ecclesiastical History, describes the baptism of the Northumbrians by Paulinus in the words, — “He washed them with the water of absolution.”

“the washing of regeneration,”1 i.e., the laver or bath, of the new birth.

It is the rule of the Church that persons, on receiving baptism publicly, should make certain solemn promises or vows. The baptismal vows are,—

1. To renounce the devil and all his works;

2. To believe in God; and, 3. To serve Him.

The observance of these vows forms man’s part in the baptismal covenant or agreement.

In the case of infants, these promises are made in their name by sponsors, or god-parents. God-parents simply promise that the child shall fulfill its part in the baptismal covenant.

Should a baptized person depart from God by unbelief, or by a course of grievous sin, such an one needs conversion. He cannot be rebaptized, for the soul can only be once ” born of water and of the Spirit.” (See pages 322, etc.)

II. THE HOLY EUCHARIST. i. The Institution.

As we have already pointed out, the sacra ments of Baptism and the Eucharist2 possess a special dignity. Many writers in East and West have seen, in the water and the blood which flowed from our Saviour’s pierced side, a symbol of these two Greater Sacraments.

a The word, Eucharist, pronounced u-ka-rist, means * thanksgiving,’ and is the name given from the earliest times to the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ.

The Institution of the Holy Eucharist.

” The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” — I Cor. x. 16.

Both were instituted by him at the close of his life on earth. The institution of the Holy Eucharist took place on the night before He died: the commission to baptize was given immediately before his ascension. We may thus regard these two greater sacraments as, in a very sacred sense, our Lord’s parting legacy to his Church.

The Holy Eucharist was instituted at the close of the Jewish Passover, which Jesus observed for the last time with his apostles in an upper room at Jerusalem. The Passover was the annual commemoration of the deliver ance of God’s people from Egypt. It carried the mind back to that awful night, in which the destroying angel slew the first-born in every house in Egypt, which was not marked by the blood of the Passover lamb. It was this visit ation which induced the Egyptian king to set the chosen people free. The whole service was a most solemn remembrance, or commemora tion before God, of a double deliverance, — from death, and from bondage. It was a deliverance wrought by means of the blood of the paschal lamb, which thus became the type of the precious blood of Christ, the Lamb of God, to be shed upon the cross for the sins of the world.

As part of the ceremonial of the Passover, it was the custom for each household to eat a lamb with unleavened cakes; a cup of wine and water being handed round at intervals. At the close of the feast which Jesus was keeping with his disciples, He took one of the unleavened cakes, and when He had given thanks, He blessed it, and, breaking it, said, — ” Take, eat; this is my body.” And then, blessing the cup,.

He added, — ” Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”1

St. Paul, who was not called to be an apostle until after our Lord’s ascension, was not present on the solemn occasion of which we are speak ing; but our blessed Lord vouchsafed to him later a special revelation concerning the insti tution, which he records in these words, — ” For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread; and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remem brance of me. After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He come. Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” 2

Thus, Jesus our Lord instituted the Holy Sacrament of his body and blood, commanding his apostles and their successors to consecrate bread and wine, as He had done, to be his flesh and blood, and to make a perpetual memorial of his death before the Father.

ii. The Eucharistic Sacrifice.

The Holy Eucharist is a feast upon a sacri fice. The body and the blood of Christ are 1 St. Matt. xxvi. 26, etc. * I Cor. xi. 23, etc.

first offered to the eternal Father, and then partaken of by the communicants. This action is termed by St. Paul, “shewing the Lord’s death.” 1 In saying, ” This do in remembrance of me,” our Lord used words which signify, —

OFFER THIS AS MY MEMORIAL BEFORE GOD.

It has often been shown that the word here translated ‘ do,’ is frequently used in the Greek version of the Old Testament for * offer;’ though the Greek Fathers, with the exception of Justin Martyr, treat the words ” do this ” as meaning ” perform this action.”9 In the following pass ages, to which the reader may refer for himself, Ex. xxix. 36, 38, 39, 41, Lev. ix. 7, 16, 22; xiv. 19; etc., the word translated ‘offer ‘ is the same as that used by our Lord when He said, ” Do this.”

The Greek word for ‘ remembrance *” has a distinctly sacrificial meaning. It is used but twice in the Old Testament, and but four times in the New. Three times in the New Testa ment, the reference is to the Holy Eucharist. Let us examine the three remaining passages, where the Greek word translated ‘ remembrance,’ is used apart from the Eucharist. By this means we shall best discover our Lord’s meaning in speaking of this sacrament as his 4 remembrance.’

In Lev. xxiv. 5-8, we read, — “And thou shalt take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes thereof,… and thou shalt set them in two rows… upon the pure table before the Lord. And thou shalt put pure frank incense upon each row, that it may be on the

1 i Cor. xi. 26.

• See Mason, The Faith of the Gospel, 1892, p. 328 note.

bread for a memorial, even an offering made by fire unto the Lord.” This passage relates to the shewbread, which was placed out of sight of the people in the Holy Place. The twelve cakes were to be for a memorial before the Lord, not for a memorial before man. God said, — “Thou shalt set upon the table show bread before me alway.”1 The purpose of the twelve cakes of the shewbread was to present before God the twelve tribes, which formed his chosen people. The word trans lated * memorial,’ is the same as that used by our Lord when He said, — “This do in re membrance of me.”

In Numbers x. 10, we read, — ” In the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; that they may be to you for a memorial before your God: I am the Lord your God ” (see also verse ‘9). The word here translated ‘ memorial/ is the same as that used by our Lord, and translated * remembrance.’ It is used of a memorial, not before man, but before God.

In Heb. x. 3, we read, — ” But in those sacri fices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.” The allusion is to the sacri fices offered yearly on the Day of Atonement. These sacrifices were offered to God, to procure pardon of the sins of the priesthood and of the nation. The high priest entered the Holy of Holies, where, unseen by man, he made “a remembrance of sins ” before God. The same word is again used.

We have now examined the only three passages in the Bible in which the Greek word for ‘ remembrance,’ is found, apart from the accounts of the institution of the Holy Eucharist. In each case it is used of A REMEMBRANCE BEFORE GOD, AND NOT BEFORE MAN; and it is only reasonable therefore to suppose, that in those instances in which it is used of the Holy Eucharist, it is intended to express the same meaning which it has elsewhere in Holy Scrip ture, viz., that Of A MEMORIAL BEFORE GOD.

That this is the true idea, is supported by St. Paul’s words spoken of the Holy Eucharist, — ” For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He come.” J

All that our Lord Jesus Christ did when He instituted the blessed Sacrament was sacrificial; it was all done in sacrificial terms, at a sacri ficial time, and for a sacrificial end.2

In connection with this important subject, the reader is asked to refer to what was said on pages 206, 207, concerning the relation which exists between the Eucharistic Sacrifice, and •our Lord’s pleading in heaven.

The Church of England, in the thirty-first Article, condemns certain false ideas concerning the Eucharistic Sacrifice. This condemnation needs careful explanation, for it has formed the

1 i Cor. xi. 26.

8 ” ‘Do this in remembrance of me;’ or ‘for the com memoration of me,’ and of my sacrifice offered on the cross, and for the continual representation of it before God on earth, as it is perpetually pleaded before him by our great high priest in heaven.” — Bishop Wordsworth on Lev. ii. Preliminary Note.

ground of unfair charges against her teaching. The conclusion of the Article is thus worded, —

” The sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits (literally, ‘ impostures ‘).”

In the middle ages three false ideas had gained ground in reference to the Eucharistic Sacrifice, and it is to these that the Article refers.

(i). The Eucharistic Sacrifice had come to be regarded as a sacrifice distinct from that of our Lord upon the cross, or as a repetition of that sacrifice. This is alluded to in the Article, where it speaks of “the sacrifices (plural) of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the priest did offer Christ.”

(2). It was believed that our Lord’s sacrifice upon the cross availed to obtain pardon of birthsin only, while the Eucharistic Sacrifice was regarded as the means of obtaining pardon of actual sin.

(3). It was commonly believed that souls in the intermediate state were in torment, from which the offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice delivered them. Each Eucharist being regarded as a distinct act of sacrifice, possessing its own independent value, it followed that the oftener the Eucharist was offered, the sooner would such suffering come to an end. It is easy to see how this idea appealed to the feelings of survivors, and how the obtaining of masses for the dead, depending as it did upon money pay ments, encouraged a traffic in holy things. It is this traffic in masses for such an end, which is denounced in the Article as a dangerous deceit,

or imposture. Masses thus purchased were generally offered in private, and, contrary to primitive custom, with no communicants present.

Upon this subject the writer of Tract 90 says, — ” The ‘ blasphemous fable ‘ (referred to in the 3ist Article) is the teaching that there is a sacrifice for sin other than Christ’s death, and that Masses are that sacrifice. And the * per nicious imposture ‘ (‘ dangerous deceit ‘) is the turning this belief into a means of filthy lucre.”1

Dr. Pusey wrote, — ” The very strength of the expressions used of ‘ the sacrifices of Masses * that ‘they were blasphemous fables and dan gerous deceits,’ the use of the plural, and the clause ‘in the which it was commonly said,’ show that what the Article speaks of is not * the sacrifice of the Mass,’ but the habit of trusting to the purchase of Masses when dying, to the neglect of a holy life, or repentance, and the grace of God and his mercy in Christ Jesus, while in health.” 2

(i). When we speak of the Holy Eucharist as a sacrifice, we do not understand any repe tition of the sacrifice of the cross, or any renewal of Christ’s sufferings or death. His sufferings and his death took place once for all, and can never be repeated. Neither are we to suppose that anything is wanting in his sufferings or sac rifice, which the Eucharistic Sacrifice supplies. But we mean that in the Holy Eucharist, we plead before God the One Sacrifice offered once upon the cross, even as Christ himself presents the same offering in heaven. Thus, the fathers

1 Newman, in Tract 90. § 9. Masses. * Eirenicon, i., pp. 25, 26.

spoke of the Holy Eucharist as ” the unbloody sacrifice.” The Eucharistic Sacrifice is not so much on a line with the sacrifice on Calvary, as with the pleading of that sacrifice in heaven.

(2). Our Lord’s sacrifice upon the cross is a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world, — not only for birth-sin, but for all actual sin.

(3). That souls in the intermediate state are benefited by the offering of the Eucharistic Sac rifice, has always been believed in the Church. St. Augustine speaks of ” the Sacrifice of our Ransom ” being offered on behalf of his departed mother. Our Lord’s death upon the cross was for all men, throughout all time, and the Euchar istic pleading of that death avails for all the Church, both on earth and in the next world. As we have already said, there is not one of the primitive liturgies which does not contain prayers for the departed, in union with the shewing forth of the Lord’s death in the Eucharist. In cele brating the Eucharist, the English Church prays that ” we and all thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins, and all other benefits of Christ’s Passion.” The living compose but a small part of ” all the whole Church,” the greater part of the Church being in the intermediate state.1

“The sacrifice of the Mass” must be distin guished from “the sacrifices of Masses,” of which the Article speaks. The latter expression

1 By the expression “all thy whole Church,” Bishop Cosin understood “those which are here on earth, and those that rest in the sleep of peace, being departed in the faith of Christ.” — Works y v. p. 119.

refers to the erroneous idea that it was the number of Masses which was the source of benefit to the departed. For example, a med ieval legend represents a certain bishop hearing a soul in purgatory say, that he should be delivered from torments, if, for thirty days fol lowing, the bishop would say thirty Masses for him.1 The idea condemned is that of the value of many Masses, as separate acts of sacrifice independent of the sacrifice of the cross; in contradistinction to the truth, that each Mass is but a continuous memorial and representation of the one sacrifice, deriving all its power from that one sacrifice. The idea condemned is that of cumulation and repetition, independent of the one and only availing sacrifice of Calvary.

The Sacrifice of the Mass, or Eucharistic Sacrifice, understood in its ancient and Catholic sense as “the continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the death of Christ,”2 the English Church has never disowned. In fact she could not disown it, without forfeiting her claim to be a portion of the Holy Catholic Church of Christ.

The word Mass, which is of uncertain origin, was retained in the first reformed Prayer Book, published in Edward the VI. ‘s reign. In that book the title of the Eucharistic Service ran, — ” The Supper of the Lorde, and the Holy communion, commonly called the Masse.” There is an objection in many minds to the use of this term, from its association with the errors to which’ we have referred. But the name is ancient, being used by St. Ambrose as far back as the year 385, long before the Catholic doc-

1 Bishop Jeremy Taylor, Dissuasive, Parti. I. 4. * The Church Catechism.

trine of the Eucharistic Sacrifice had been corrupted by medieval additions.

The reason why the Sacrificial aspect of the Holy Eucharist is not more fully recognized in the Book of Common Prayer is, that the idea of Communion, which was a primary purpose of our Lord in giving us the Holy Sacrament of his body and blood, had in the middle ages been suffered to fall into the background. The majority of persons in those times received but once a year; and six times a year was considered a large allowance for devoted women in the religious houses. In restoring the idea of the importance of Communion, and as a revulsion from the unhappy teaching of which we have been speaking, the true balance was lost; and, in the reaction, the sacrificial aspect of this Great Service was, by force of circum stances, not so fully recognized in drawing up our Eucharistic Service as it N ought to have been. But the use of the Prayer of Consecration by the priest, in which the New Testament account of our LORD’S institution is closely followed, is sufficient indication of the Church’s intention in regard to this important matter. Moreover, in the Prayer of Oblation, we ask God to accept “this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving,” the old term for the Eucharistie Sacrifice, and go on to speak of the offering of ” ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be a reason able, holy, and lively sacrifice ” unto God. x

1 This is the sacrifice of Christians, the many who are one body in Christ, which also the Church continually cele brates in the sacrament of the altar known to the faithful, where it is shown to her that in the very thing which she offers, she herself also is offered.” — St. Augustine, £0 Civitatt, x. 6.

The Eucharist is the worship of almighty God by the oblation of Christ, with all the members of his body, the Church, in union with him. As St. Augustine, speaking of Christ and the Church, says, — “Whole Christ consisteth of head and body.” In offering the Eucharist to the eternal Father, the oblation is not that of Christ alone, but of the head with the mem bers. The words written of King Solomon and his subjects, may be applied to the Eucharistic Sacrifice, ” The king, and all Israel with him, offered sacrifice before the Lord.” T Thus the offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is the supreme act of Christian worship.

iii. The Eucharistic Feast,

commonly called The Holy Communion.

Our Lord Jesus Christ ordained the sacra ment of the Eucharist in order that we might be able on earth to plead his sacrifice before the face of God, even as He does in heaven. But there was a further object of supreme importance, namely, that He might feed our souls with his sacred body and blood.

That we may thus be able to feed upon him, He has given to his Church authority to con secrate, by the power of his Holy Spirit, bread and wine to become his body and blood. When we receive the bread and the wine thus con secrated, we verily and indeed receive the sacred flesh and blood of Christ.

The certainty of this depends on the truth 1 I Kings viii. 62.

known as the Real Presence. The term Real Presence signifies the presence of a reality. This reality is the body and blood of Christ, present in the Sacrament under the forms of bread and wine. Our Lord’s presence in the Eucharist is a spiritual presence. By a spiritual presence we are not to understand that which is unreal, or figurative; but a presence which is not merely natural, or material. A spiritual presence is a presence of a supernatural order. Our Lord is present in the blessed Sacrament in a manner which is beyond our understanding. The Real Presence is a holy mystery.

When we come to the Holy Communion, we should always remember that we are approach ing the Presence of God; and that, in com municating, we receive the body and blood of Christ, hidden beneath the earthly elements of bread and wine. As it has been said, — “Before consecration, we called them God’s creatures of bread and wine, now we do so no more after consecration; for after consecration we think no more of bread and wine, but have our thoughts taken up wholly with the body of Christ; and therefore we keep ourselves to these words only, abstaining from the other, though the bread remain there still, to the eye. And herein we follow the fathers, who after consecration would not suffer it to be called bread and wine any longer, but the body and blood of Christ.”1 Similarly, Bishop Overall says, ” In the sacrament of the Eucharist, or the Lord’s Supper, the body and blood of Christ, and therefore the whole of Christ, is verily and indeed present, and is verily partaken by us,

and verily combined with the sacramental signs; so that in the bread duly given and received, the body of Christ is given and received; in the wine given and received, the blood of Christ is given and received; and thus there is a communion of the whole of Christ, in the communion of the Sacrament; yet not in any bodily, gross, earthly manner, but in a mystical, heavenly, and spiritual manner.” x

The body and blood of Christ is not received sensibly, nor perceived by our natural senses, as earthly food is. It is received by the soul, by that part of us which has communion with spiritual and heavenly things. In Communion, Christ enters into us through the higher part of our nature, pervading us hiddenly and silently, cleansing our souls from the stains of sin, sub duing in us what is evil, and quickening in us what is good. And thus our spiritual life grows, our union with Christ is more closely knit, and his likeness formed within our souls. With this communication of his life, there is laid up in us the seed of our immortality, the seed of that spiritual body into which our natural body is to be transformed.

But the reader may learn most about the Holy Communion by referring to our Lord’s words, recorded in the sixth chapter of the Gospel according to St. John. The subject of this solemn discourse is ” The bread of life,

NX Quoted in The. Doctrine of the Sacraments, by Alexandei Knox, p. 95. (See Remains, vol. ii. p. 163.) This testi mony of Bishop Overall to the teaching of the Church of England on the subject of the Real Presence is important. The conclusion of the Catechism, which treats of the Holy Communion, should be read side by side with what he says above, for it was compiled by him.

the meat which endureth unto everlasting life.” Jesus Christ declares that it is his special province to give it, and that the Father has ” sealed,” or appointed him to do so (verse 27). He goes on to identify this bread of life with himself, saying, ” I am the bread of life” (verse 35). He next teaches explicitly that the bread of life is his flesh, in the words, ” the bread that I will give is my flesh ” (verse 51), and declares in the plainest terms that the life of the soul depends on feeding upon him, — ” Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you” (verse 53). This language about eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ is never again used in the New Testament except in reference to the Holy Communion. Our Lord concludes this great discourse by con necting the highest blessings with this feeding upon himself in Holy Communion, — ” Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath •eternal life; and I will *aise him up at the last day…. He that eateth this bread shall live for ever” (verses 54, 58). x

1 The fathers have ever applied our Lord’s words in St. John vi. to the Holy Communion; and this is the teaching of the Church of England as expressed in the 3rd Exhortation, and in the Prayer of Humble Access, in the Communion Service.

PRIMITIVE TESTIMONY TO THE DOCTRINES OF THE REAL PRESENCE, AND THE EUCHARISTIC SACRIFICE.

ST. IGNATIUS. A.D. no.

“They (certain heretics) abstain from Eucharist and prayer, because they allow not that the Eucharist is the flesh of our

Saviour Jesus Christ, which flesh suffered for our sins, and which the Father of his goodness raised up.” — ad Smyrn. vii. “There is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one cup <unto union in his blood — one altar.” — ad Phil. iv.

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR. A.D. 150.

” For we do not receive them as ordinary food, or ordinary drink, but as by the word of God, Jesus Christ our Saviour was made flesh, and had both flesh and blood for our salva tion; so also, the food which was blessed by the prayer of the word which proceeded from him, and from which our flesh and blood, by assimilation, receive nourishment, is, we are taught, both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” — Apol. i. 66.

“The oblation of the flour, which was commanded to be offered for those who were cleansed from leprosy, was a type of the bread of the Eucharist, which Jesus Christ our Lord commanded us to offer, in remembrance of the Passion which He underwent for those who purify their souls from all sin. Hence God speaks thus by Malachi (i. 10, n) of the sacrifices then offered by you; ‘ I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand. For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering.’ ” — Dial. 41.

ST. IREN^US. A.D. 175.

” For as the bread which is from the earth, on receiving the invocation of God is no longer common bread, but Eucharist, consisting of two things, an earthly and a •spiritual, so our bodies, by partaking of the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, in that they have a hope of resur rection.” — against Heresies, iv. 18. 5-

“Teaching his disciples to offer to God firstfruits from his own creatures, He took that bread which is part of the creation, and gave thanks, saying, ‘ This is my body,’ and similarly declared the cup, which is part of the creation that we know of, to be his blood; and taught us the new oblation of the new covenant, which the Church, receiving from the apostles, offers throughout the whole world to God.” — against Heresies, iv. 17. 5.

iv. Fasting Communion.

To receive the Holy Communion before taking any other food or drink, has been the custom of the whole Church from the earliest times. It is true that our Lord instituted the Sacrament of his body and blood in the evening, at the conclusion of the Jewish Passover. Bu-t the Passover was not an ordinary meal; it was the most solemn sacrifice of the Jewish Church. Moreover, both our Lord and his apostles were fasting when they received it, in accordance with the custom which ordered that “from the time of the evening sacrifice, nothing was to be eaten till the Paschal Supper, so that all might come to it with relish.”1 The Holy Communion is the Christian Passover, a feast following a sacrifice, and therefore it was fitting that it should be instituted at the conclusion of the last of the long series of Jewish Passovers. While we are bound to copy our Lord closely in the great features of the first celebration of the Holy Eucharist (such as in the use of bread and wine, and the words of consecration), yet there are minor details in which we are not required to do so. For example, our cele brations cannot follow the Jewish Passover, or be held in an upper room at Jerusalem with none but the clergy present. And the hour at which we celebrate need not be the same.

The Jewish Passover was celebrated in the evening, for it was during the night that the destroying angel passed over the houses of the Israelites, thus sparing them from death. Our

1 Edersheim, Temple Service^ p. 203.

deliverance from death was sealed by our Lord’s resurrection, which took place early in the morning; and it is therefore fitting that we should celebrate the Christian Passover at the time He rose.1

It is true that for a few years after the Ascension, the Eucharist was celebrated in the evening, and in connection with a social meal named the Agape, or Lovefeast; we know for certain that this was so at Corinth. But the abuses connected with these evening Com munions were so grievous, that the Church soon discouraged them, insisting on the custom that the body and blood of Christ should be received by those only who were fasting. It was thought fitting that the heavenly food of the soul should be received before the earthly food of the body. The rapidity with which the change was accomplished, and its universal acceptance, lead to the conclusion that it was made on the authority of the apostles themselves. While the hour of celebrating on Sundays and festivals was early in the morning, it was later on fast days, sometimes being as late as 3 o’clock in the afternoon; but on every occasion, late as well as early, none but fasting communions were made.

Sunday evening Communion never existed

1 St. Cyprian, writing A.D. 253, gives a reason why the Holy Eucharist was celebrated in the morning, rather than in the evening when Christ instituted it. He says, — “It behoved Christ to offer at the evening of the day, that the very hour of sacrifice might imitate the setting and evening of the world, as it is written in Exodus, ‘ And the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening ‘ (xii. 6). But we celebrate the resurrection of the Lord in the morning.” — Ep. Ixiii. 13.

anywhere:* ” We have no such custom, neither the Churches of God.”

The historical evidence for the practice of fasting Communion is so continuous and com plete, that the Rev. F. W. Puller, who has studied the subject very carefully, is only able to find one exception from the general rule of fasting communion from the close of the first century to the Reformation, — a period of nearly 1,500 years. This exception was in the case of some Egyptian Christians, who received the Sacrament after supper. Their conduct is mentioned by the his torians Socrates and Sozomen in terms of con demnation, and as a breach of an universal usage.

To prove the universality of the custom, we quote the words of St. Augustine, — ” It clearly appears (from the account in St. Matthew’s Gospel) that, when the disciples first received the body and blood of the Lord, they did not receive fasting. Must we therefore censure the universal Church, because the Sacrament is always received by persons who are fasting? Nay, verily; for from that time it has seemed good to the Holy Ghost that, in honor of so great a sacrament, the body of the Lord should enter the mouth of a Christian before other food: and it is for this reason that the custom referred to is observed throughout the whole

1 “It was a rule in the African Church to receive the Eucharist fasting at all times, except one day, which was the Thursday before Easter, commonly called Ccena Domini, because it was the day on which our Saviour celebrated his last Supper, and instituted the Eucharist after supper: in imitation of which, it was the custom to celebrate the Eucharist after supper on this day, in the African churches, but on no other day whatsoever.” — Bingham’s Antiquities t iv. 7. 8.

world. For it does not follow that, because the Lord gave the Communion after food, the brethren should now be bound to assemble after having dined or supped to receive that Sacrament, or, as they used to do, whom the apostle reproves and corrects, to mingle it with their meals. For the Saviour, in order that He might the more urgently commend the depth of that mystery, wished by making this his last act, to imprint it more deeply on the hearts and memory of his disciples, from whom He was about to depart to his Passion: and He did not prescribe in what order it should thenceforth be received, because He wished to reserve this work for his apostles, through whom He intended to set in order the Churches. For if He had admonished them that this Sacrament should always be received after other food, I believe that no one would have changed that practice. But when the apostle, speaking of this Sacrament, says: — * Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another: and if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together under condemnation: ‘ he immediately added: 4 And the rest will I set in order when I come.’ Whence we are given to understand that (since it was too much for him to suggest in his Epistle that whole order of proceeding which is observed by the universal Church throughout the world) the observance which is varied by no diversity of customs was one of the things set in order by the apostle in person.” x

Commenting upon St. Augustine’s words, Dr. Bright says, — ” From a survey of this passage 1 First Letter toJTanuarius, Ep. liv. 6.

nothing can be more certain than that St. Augus tine regarded the rule of ‘ fasting Communion ‘ as (i) observed by the Church universal: (2) therefore traceable to apostolic authority, e.g., St. Paul’s; and therefore (3) possessing divine sanction.” J

While fasting Communion has thus ever been regarded as the universal rule, certain exceptions have been permitted. Persons in danger of death have always been allowed to receive their last Communion after taking food; and the exception, it has been thought, may not unreasonably be extended to those whose bodily infirmities make fasting reception im possible. While * necessity knows no law/ yet to break lightly a custom of the Church so universal, is very wrong; and all Christians who hold the Church to be the kingdom of God on earth, are in duty bound to observe her rules. Bishop Jeremy Taylor (who died A.D. 1667) says, — “It is a Catholic custom, that they who receive the Holy Communjon should receive it fasting. This is not a duty commanded by God (i.e., a matter of divine law): but unless it be necessary to eat, he that despises this custom gives nothing but the testimony of an evil mind.” 3

It is true that the Church of England does not, in the Book of Common Prayer, expressly enjoin fasting Communion. But as the rule was in full force when the Prayer Book was first put out in 1549, something surely would have been said if it had been meant that the practice should be discontinued. In an explanation of

the Prayer Book, first published in 1657, by Bishop Sparrow (one of its revisers, and who must be supposed to have known what was intended), it is expressly said, — “This Sacra ment should be received fasting.” Moreover, the Church of England declares in the Preface to the Prayer Book that she has no intention of * striking at any laudable practice of the whole Catholic Church of Christ,’ — and the custom of fasting Communion is certainly such a practice. An English Canon of 960 still exists, never having been repealed, which runs, — “We charge that no man take the housel (the old English word for the Holy Communion) after he hath broke his fast, except it be on account of extreme sickness.” x

r Johnson’s English Canons, vol. i. p. 419.

” The usual hour for the solemnity of the Communion service was anciently nine of the clock, morning; this is the canonical hour. It is the most convenient hour for all to meet, and despatch this with other offices before noon. For, till the service was ended, men were persuaded to be fasting; and therefor eSt was thought fit to end all the •ervice before noon, that people might be free to eat.”

“This Sacrament should be received fasting. And so was the practice of the universal Church, says St. Augustine, which is authority enough to satisfy any that do not love contention.”

” It was an ancient custom after burial to go to the Holy Communion, unless the office were performed after noon. For then, if men were not fasting, it was done only with prayers.”

Bishop Sparrow’s Rationale upon the Book of Common Prayer, pp. 195, 196; 218, 219; 285. The last edition of this work which appeared in the Bishop’s lifetime, was published A.D. 1684, twenty-two years after the final rerision of the Prayer Book. From this edition the above quotations are made.

286 7′ he Sacramtnts.

III. CONFIRMATION.

Confirmation is the laying on of the bishop’s hand upon those who have been baptized, in order that they may be strengthened by the Gift of the Holy Spirit. Thus, it is sometimes named, as in the Prayer Book, ” the Laying on of Hands.” Confirmation is the perfection and strength of baptism and baptismal grace.

It is the belief of the Church, that in Con firmation the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit^ named in Isa. xi. 2, 3, are in their fulness be stowed upon the soul which rightly approaches this sacrament.

The seven gifts of the Holy Ghost are, —

1. WISDOM, to aid us in our search after God.

2. UNDERSTANDING, to lead us to a knowledge of the truth.

3. COUNSEL, to help us to discern the right path.

4. GHOSTLY STRENGTH, to confirm us in doing right.

5. KNOWLEDGE, to teach us the will of God.

6. TRUE GODLINESS, to help us to lead good lives.

7. HOLY FEAR, to aid us in loving and obeying God as our Father.

The gifts of Wisdom, Understanding, Counsel, and Knowledge, enlighten the reason, and en able us to apprehend and confess the Faith; the gifts of Ghostly Strength, True Godliness, and Holy Fear, strengthen the will, and enable

us to overcome the temptations of the worldr the flesh, and the devil. Thus, by the Gift of God bestowed through the Laying on of Hands, our whole moral nature is rendered capable of advance toward perfection, and we are enabled to bring forth the fruits of theSpirit.1

In New Testament times, the administration of Confirmation was accompanied by the be stowal of miraculous gifts, such as, for example.,, the power to speak with tongues. These mi raculous or extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost in Confirmation, are not to be confused with his ordinary and abiding gifts in this sacrament. The extraordinary gifts were for the benefit of others, and not for the formation of holiness in those who exercised them. The Church, teaches that, in the administration of the sacra ments, whatever concerns the welfare of souls or the communication of grace, is ordinary and abiding. Thus, while the extraordinary gifts have ceased, the ordinary gifts are still bestowed in the Laying on of Hands.

In the New Testament the sacrament of Confirmation is closely associated with that of Holy Baptism.

In Acts viii. 12, etc., we read a description of the first occasion on which the Church of Christ was extended beyond the gates of Jeru salem, and thus have an excellent example of how beginners in the Christian religion were then dealt with. St. Philip, a deacon, taught and baptized the Samaritans, but the apostles

1 “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.” — Gal. v. 22, 23.

must confirm. Two of these chief ministers, at a busy time in the Church’s history, came a journey of forty or fifty miles to lay their hands upon the baptized, that they might re ceive the Holy Ghost. ” Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.”

In Acts xix. i, etc., we have the record of St. Paul first baptizing, and then confirming twelve persons at Ephesus. ” They were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them.”

In naming the six rudiments of the doctrine of Christ, the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of ” the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands; ” x where the two sacraments are again coupled together. We have probably a reference to a like association in Acts ii. 38, and in Tit. iii. 5. Thus, Con firmation is believed to be the completion of Baptism. For 1000 years throughout the whole Church, Confirmation immediately followed Baptism, even in the case of infants; and this is the present custom of the Eastern Church. In the West it is usual to defer Confirmation until children have arrived at years of discretion, and with us it is accompanied by a renewal of the vows of Baptism.

This renewal of vows is not Confirmation. In point of fact, this adjunct of Confirmation has only been in the Prayer Book for about 250 years. The renewal of vows is a good and edifying accompaniment to Confirmation, though no necessary part of the sacrament. 1 vi. i, 2.

Confirmation, like Baptism, can be received but once in a lifetime, for it imprints a character or mark upon the soul, which can never be effaced.

IV. PENANCE. i. A bsolution.

It has been said, — ” The sacrament of Peni tence were not needed, if we ever kept faithfully the gift in Baptism: it is but a Second plank given to us by the mercy of God after ship wreck.”1 Baptism conveys remission of all sins previously committed, but since we can never be baptized a Second time, the sacra mental cleansing from sin after Baptism takes place in Absolution.

The ordinance we are considering is some times named the sacrament of Absolution, and sometimes that of Penitence or Penance. The word absolution, signifies ‘loosing,’ or ‘release.’ Absolution is the authoritative declaration of God’s pardon, the instrumental cause of release from the bonds of sin, and, at the same time, the means of imparting renewed life to the soul. Penitence is the necessary preparation, on man’s part, for the gift of Absolution.

The sacrament of Absolution was instituted by Jesus Christ after his resurrection; we give the account in the words of the Gospel, — ” Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and 1 Pusey, Eirenicon, iii., p. 92.

u

saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when He had so said, He shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” x

By these words our Lord constituted the apostles and their successors the ministers of Absolution. “The power of remitting sins,” says Bishop Sparrow,2 “was not to end with the apostles, but is a part of the ministry of reconciliation, as necessary now as it was then, and therefore to continue as long as the ministry of reconciliation, that is, to the end of the world.” The bestowal of the power to ‘ retain,’ as well as to * remit ‘ sins in his name, shews that our Lord intended the Church to be the judge of the sinner’s penitence. Further, in order that this power may be exercised, it is needful for the sinner seeking forgiveness to open his heart by confession of sin. Such a course, with a view to receiving Absolution, is referred to in the exhortation before communion in the Prayer Book. The words are, — ” If there be any of you, who… cannot quiet his own conscience herein, but requireth further comfort or counsel, let him come to me, or to some other discreet and learned minister

* Rationale upon the Book of Common Prayer, 1684,

of God’s word, and open his grief; that by the ministry of God’s holy word he may receive the benefit of absolution, together with ghostly coun sel and advice, to the quieting of his conscience, and avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness.”

The gift of Absolution proceeds from our Lord Jesus Christ. He “hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him.” The Church so realizes this truth, that, in admitting men to the order of the priesthood, she dwells very specially upon it. In the English Church every priest is admitted to his sacred office by the bishop, who lays his hands upon the priest’s head saying, — ” Receive the Holy Ghost, for the office and work of a priest in the Church of God, now committed unto these by the imposition of our hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained. And be thou a faithful dispenser of the word of God, and of his holy sacraments; in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.” ‘

The Prayer Book speaks three times of the power of Absolution. In Morning and Evening Prayer there is a declaration of this power; in the Communion Service a still stronger ex pression of it is found; but in the Order for the Visitation of the Sick, we have the form for the actual exercise of the power of Ab solution. This last is a most solemn and direct.assurance of pardon, since it can only be pronounced after a full confession of sins before the priest.

1 The Ordering of Priests* The rubric directs, —

Here shall the sick person be moved to make a special Confession of his sins, if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter. After which Confession, the Priest shall absolve him (if he humbly and heartily desire it) after this sort.

OUR Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive these thine offences • And by his authority committed to me, I absolve these from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

” The power of remitting sin,” says Bishop Andrewes, ” is originally in God, and in God alone; in Christ our Saviour, by means of the union of the Godhead and manhood into one person, by virtue whereof the Son of Man hath power to forgive sins upon earth. (St. Mark ii. 10.) This of the apostles’ is nothing else but a branch out of his, which He himself as man had here upon earth. For as man He himself was sent and was anointed with the Spirit, and proceeded by commission.” x

If it be objected that it is presumptuous for the priest to say, ” I absolve these from all thy sins,” the answer is, — Absolution is the divinely-appointed means through which God’s forgiveness flows out to the penitent: and it cannot be presumptuous to use the power which Christ has so clearly given to his priests. The words of St. Ambrose may be quoted here, — “Why do you baptize, if it is not lawful for men to forgive sins. In baptism there is cer tainly forgiveness of all sins. What difference 1 Sermons, vol. v. pp. 85, 90.

Is there between exercising the right in penitence or in baptism? The mystery is the same in both cases.” ‘

We should remember, too, that the priest, in absolving, acts in the name and on the part of the Church. The sentence of Absolution runs, — ” Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to his Church to absolve, etc….” The power of Absolution does not belong to the priest personally, but as ministering for God on behalf of the Church. The words of St. James a concerning forgiveness in connection with Unction bring this out, many being present. In the early centuries Absolution was given publicly to individuals in the churches. Private Absolution was introduced later, to avoid the scandal of open and public confessions of sin.

ii. Repentance.

Before a priest can absolve in this direct and solemn way, it is necessary that he should be assured of the sinner’s repentance.

Repentance consists of three parts, —

(i.) CONTRITION. (2.) CONFESSION. (3.) AMENDMENT.

(i.) CONTRITION.

The groundwork of a true repentance is contrition. Without contrition, confession is of no avail, and there can be no lasting amend ment of life. Contrition is the hatred of sin, springing from love of God. The true penitent 1 cU Panit., i. 8. 40×5. ed. Ben. a v. 14, 15.

294 ^* Sacraments.

views sin as an outrage against the love of God; he sees in the Passion and Death of Jesus the work and the result of his sin. Contrition is the breaking of the heart in the thought of God’s love, as it is manifested in the Passion. True contrition places the soul in a state of reconciliation and peace with God. ” The sacrifice of God is a troubled spirit: a broken and contrite heart, O God, shalt thou not despise.” T (2.) CONFESSION.

Contrition leads naturally to confession, or the truthful acknowledgment of sin. Confession is self-accusation, and the acknowledgment to God of wrong doing. God demands confession as a condition of pardon. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.” 2 A willingness to confess is an evidence of contrition. The most searching confession is that made privately before a priest.

” It is neither prudent nor safe always to rely upon our own judgment of ourselves, for another Eye sees more of us than is discerned by our own. In the dangers of our body we consult the physician, in the intricacies of our estate we advise with the lawyer, and in the care of our immortal souls why do we not advise with our spiritual physicians? for they are appointed by Christ himself to direct the ignorant, confirm the doubtful, and comfort the disconsolate.

” Confession to a priest is with us restored to its primitive use, for we direct all men always to confess to God, but some also to confess 1 Ps. li. 17. a i St. John i. 9.

their faults and reveal their doubts to the priest, especially in these three cases: — first, when we are disquieted with the guilt of some sin already committed; or, secondly, when we cannot con quer some lust or passion; or, thirdly, when we are afflicted with any intricate scruples; particularly whether we may now be fit to receive the blessed Sacrament or no.” I

It is upon such private confession before a priest, that the penitent can receive the most direct assurance of pardon which Jesus Christ empowers the Church to pronounce. The form of confession commonly used in this case is as follows: —

I CONFESS to GOD the Father Almighty, to his only begotten Son Jesus Christ, and to God the Holy Ghost, before the whole company of heaven, and to you, my father, that I have sinned exceedingly “in thought, word, and deed, by my fault, my own fault, my own most grievous fault; especially I confess that I have committed these sins, (after naming all his sins, the penitent concludes the confession with the words, —) For these and all my other sins which I cannot now remember, I am. heartily sorry, I firmly purpose amendment; I most humbly ask pardon of God; and of you, my spiritual father, I beg for penance, advice, and absolution. Wherefore I pray God the Father Almighty, his only begotten Son Jesus Christ, and God the Holy Ghost to have mercy upon me, and you, my father, to pray for me to the Lord our God. Amen.

1 Dean Comber’s Companion to the Temple, iii. 8. 60, — a commentary on the Prayer Book published A.D. 1684, twenty-two years after the last revision.

The Church of England invites sinners, who cannot otherwise make their peace with God, to open their grief (i.e., to reveal the sin which causes the grief) before the priest, in order that they may secure “the benefit of absolution.” Such confession is called by Bishop Cosin, Sacramental Confession, and is a blessed privilege open to all who heartily desire it. Our blessed Lord has given to his priests power and au thority to absolve from all sins, and He surely means them to use this power. But before they can fully do so, it is needful that those seeking absolution should confess their sins. Thus we may be quite sure that private con fession, as an outcome of real contrition, is a practice well pleasing to our Lord.1

We must remember that, strictly speaking, to absolve is not to forgive; God alone forgives. To absolve is to unloose the bonds which sin has placed upon the soul, and to remove the bar to the receiving of grace. In raising Lazarus from the dead, our Lord pronounced the words, ” Loose him, and let him go.” 2 This was the part of the people toward him whom Christ raised. And so God, who pardons the penitent, bids the priest in absolution to loose him and let him go.

The Church of England, in Canon CXIII., strictly forbids the priest to divulge what has been said in confession. The words are, — ” If any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the minister… we do straitly charge and admonish him, that he do not at any time reveal

1 See Dr. Pusey’s Statement on Sacramental Confession,, pp. 387, etc., of this work. * St. John xi. 44.

and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offense so committed to his trust and secrecy.” (3.) AMENDMENT.

Amendment, or Satisfaction as it is sometimes called, is the forsaking of sin. It is described by St. John the Baptist as ” the bringing forth fruits answerable to amendment of life.” x Amendment is the crowning test of genuine repentance, and a sure evidence of true con trition. Amendment is the steadily-sustained resolve to sin no more, and is, in a certain sense, a compensation for past iniquity. In the case of injury done to others, the idea of restitution enters in, as a necessary part of repentance. We have a marked instance of such restitution in the case of Zacchaeus, who said to our Lord, ” If I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.” 2

V. HOLY ORDER.

The Sacrament of Holy Order gives power and authority to exercise the work of the Ministry in the Church of God. This power and authority proceeds from Jesus Christ, the divine head of the Church. He first gave it to the apostles, to hand on to the bishops, and, through the bishops, to the priests of the Church. The bishops only are able to bestow Holy Orders. This they do at the Ember seasons. The Church of England appoints days of fasting at these times, and calls upon

1 St. Matt. iii. 8, margin. » St. Luke xix. 8.

her members to ask God’s guidance for the bishops in selecting fitting persons for the ministry of the Church, and his blessing upon such persons. Our Lord himself spent a whole night in prayer before choosing his apostles; x and before St. Paul and St. Barnabas were sent forth, the Church fasted and prayed.3 There are two prayers, provided by the Church, to be said every day in the Ember weeks; one of these we give below; —

ALMIGHTY God, our heavenly Father, jf\. who hast purchased to thyself an uni versal Church, by the precious blood of thy dear Son; Mercifully look upon the same, and at this time so guide and govern the minds of thy servants the bishops and pastors of thy flock, that they may lay hands suddenly on no man, but faithfully and wisely make choice of fit persons to serve in the sacred ministry of thy Church. And to those which shall be ordained to any holy function give thy grace and heavenly benediction; that both by their life and doctrine they may set forth thy glory, and set forward the salvation of all men; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Sacrament of Holy Order, like Holy Baptism and Confirmation, imprints a mark or character upon those who receive it, which ever remains; and therefore ordination cannot be repeated.

Upon the subject of the ministry of the Church, we have already spoken fully in Chapter III. of th” First Part of this book. 1 St. Luke vi. 12, 13. » Acts xiii. 3.

VI. HOLY MATRIMONY.

Holy Matrimony or Marriage is the Sacra ment which hallows the union of man and woman, and bestows upon them the grace to live together in godliness and love. Marriage is * an honorable estate, instituted of God in the time of man’s innocency,’ and is described by St. Paul as a ” great mystery,” and as a type of the union between Christ and his Church.1

Marriage is a bond sealed by God, which nothing but death can break. In speaking of this bond, our Lord said, — “For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh. Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” 3

Marriage having this binding force, divorce is contrary to the divine institution. Unfortunately the State in this land, as in other countries, has placed itself at variance with the law of Christ and of his Church, both in the way in which it permits divorce, and also in sanctioning the marriage of divorced persons. It is true that a. difference of opinion exists in the Church, as to the lawfulness of an innocent party re-marrying after separation from a guilty partner. 3 But the law of the Church of England, as expressed in the Marriage Service and in Canon CVIL, is that such re-marriage is contrary to the divine intention, — death alone being regarded as the dissolver of the bond, setting the survivor free to marry again.*

1 Eph. v. 32. » St. Matt. xix. 5, 6.

‘ Library of the Fathers, Tertullian, Note O, pp. 443, etc.

When our Lord said, — ” Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery,” x it has been thought that He is not referring to unfaithfulness after marriage, but to unchastity in the woman before marriage which had not been acknowledged. The Greek word here translated ‘ fornication,’ is generally used of sin in an unmarried person, and not of unfaithfulness in a wife, for which a different word, translated ‘ adultery,’ is con stantly used. The Jewish law punished with death a bride who thus deceived her husband.

By the laws of the Church, which are based upon the Holy Scriptures, there are certain forbidden degrees of relationship within which marriages are unlawful. A list of these wi}\ be found at the end of this book. (See page 404.)

Marriage contracted before a Registrar, though valid, lacks the benediction of the Church, which every Christian couple should seek and secure. Baptized persons only are eligible for marriage by the Church.

VII. UNCTION.

In speaking of the Reformation we said, that while the English Church came out of the movement with essentials unimpaired, yet there were certain losses which we need to repair. Of one of these losses, and that a serious one, we must now speak. We refer to the Sacra ment of Unction, or the Anointing of the Sick. 1 St Matt. v. 32; xix. 9.

Bishop Forbes wrote, — “The Unction of the Sick is the lost pleiad x of the Anglican firmament. One must at once confess and deplore that a distinctly Scriptural practice has ceased to be commanded in the Church of England. Excuses may be made of ‘ corrupt following of the apostles,’ in that it was used, contrary to the mind of St. James, when all hope of the restoration of bodily health was gone; a but it cannot be denied that there has been practically lost an apostolic practice, whereby, in case of grievous sickness, the faith ful were anointed and prayed over, for the forgiveness of their sins, and to restore them, if God so willed, or to give them spiritual support in their maladies. ‘ Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the Church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer

” It is this abuse which is responsible for our disuse of Unction since the Reformation. Dr. Pusey says, — “In regard to the Anointing of the Sick, the Greek Church follows strictly the direction of St. James. The devout sick, »t least, send to the physician of the soul as well as of the body, and in ‘ the anointing of the sick,’ they look for benefit both to the body, if it should so please God, and to the soul. A Russian priest informed me of a case, which he knew, of a man, who, by the use of anointing, with the prayer of faith by the presbyters, had been raised up three times from dangerous illness. Had the Roman Church adhered to this practice, we could never have had the mention of ‘ the corrupt following of the apostles ‘ (Article xxv.); for that language relates to the then custom, not to anoint the sick until they were ‘ in extremis.’ Had they in the Roman Church retained the practice as the Greek Church retains it, we should doubtless have retained it also.” — Eirenicon i., pp. 219, 220.

of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him: ‘” x and the bishop adds, — ” Since, however, the Visitation of the Sick is a private office, and uniformity is re quired only in the public offices, there is nothing to hinder the revival of the apostolic and scrip tural custom of anointing the sick, whensoever any devout person may desire it.” 2

The form for such administration is given in the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. It is as follows, —

If the sick person desire to be anointed, then shall the Priest anoint him upon the forehead or breast only, making the sign of the cross, saying thus, — As with this visible oil thy body outwardly is anointed: so our heavenly Father, Almighty God, grant of his infinite goodness, that thy soul inwardly may be anointed with the Holy Ghost, who is the Spirit of all strength, comfort, relief, and gladness: and vouchsafe for his great mercy (if it be his blessed will) to restore unto these thy bodily health, and strength, to serve him; and send these release of all thy pains, troubles, and diseases, both in body and mind. And howsoever his goodness (by his divine and unsearchable providence) shall dispose of these: we, his unworthy ministers and servants, humbly beseech the eternal Majesty to do with these accord ing to the multitude of his innumerable mercies, and to pardon these all thy sins and offences, committed by all thy bodily senses, passions, and carnal affections: who also rouchsafe mercifully to grant unto these ghostly strength, by his Holy Spirit, to withstand and overcome all temptations and assaults of thine adversary, that in no wise he prevail against these, but that thou mayest have perfect victory and triumph against the devil, sin, and death, through Christ our Lord: who by his death hath overcome the prince of death, and with the Father and the Holy Ghost evermore liveth and reigneth God, world without end. Amen.

* Explanation of the xxxix. Articles, 3rd Ed. pp. 445, 474.

Chapter XVIII. Prayer

RELIGION is the bond between the soul and God. This bond is one which may be strengthened or weakened, as every soul wills. It is weakened, and even broken, by sin; it is strengthened by prayer. Prayer braces the bond of religion from man’s side, and draws down the grace which strengthens it from God’s side. Without prayer the soul loses its hold upon God. God soon fades away from the mental vision of those who never pray.

Of all beings here below, man alone prays. In many ways we closely resemble the lower animals, but there is this striking difference between us and them, — we can pray, and they cannot do so. The reason for this is, that man has a rational soul, while a beast has not. It is natural to us to pray, for the soul was made for communion with God. If we look at the handle, barrel, and wards of a key, we say, This key was made to turn in a lock: if we look within ourselves, we can say, — My soul was made for God, and to hold communion with him. When the soul prays, it is doing that for which it was made. This communion with God is called Prayer. St. Augustine defines prayer to be, ” the turning of the heart to God.”

St. John Damascene says, — ” Prayer is the elevation or ascent of the soul to God.” It is not only natural to pray, but God has bidden us do so. There is hardly any subject more continually brought to our notice in the Bible, both by precept and example, than that of prayer. The Holy Scriptures give innumerable instances of prayer, frequently telling us the very words used so acceptably to God. Our Lord Jesus Christ is our Great Example, and in the Gospels we often read of him praying, many of the prayers which He said being recorded there. He taught his disciples to pray, and gave them and us the best of all prayers, — the Lord’s Prayer. No one can read the Scriptures without learning that prayer is a duty and a necessity, as well as a high privilege.

Prayer is the soul’s converse with God. When we see a man upon his knees we can say, — There is one who holds communion with his God.1 This communion with God in prayer, involves much more than the mere asking for certain things. There are five parts of prayer, viz.,

1. Adoration, ~\ which concern God’s 2. Thanksgiving, f glory.

3. Confession, j which concern our individual 4. Petition,) needs.

5. Intercession, which concerns the needs of others.

1 When Dr. Livingstone was found dead upon his knees in his tent in Africa, his native servant, thinking that he was engaged in prayer, exclaimed, ‘ The white man is holding communion with his God.’

Prayer implies and teaches our dependence upon God, in whom “we live, and move, and have our being.” x Prayer must be offered in faith, and through the merits of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. “What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.” 2 ” If ye shall ask anything in my name, I will do it.” 3

” We all have to seek God’s face above; we all have souls to be sanctified and saved; we all have sins and passions to beat back and to conquer. And these things are achieved pre eminently by prayer, which is properly and representatively the action of religion. It is the action whereby we men, in all our frailty and defilement, associate ourselves with our divine Advocate on high, and realize the sub lime bond which in him, the one Mediator between God and man, unites us in our utter unworthiness to the strong and all-holy God.” * Objections to Prayer answered.

Objections have been raised against the holy practice of prayer, which it is well to meet.

i. It has been urged that as God always works by law, it is useless to pray; for how can man’s prayers alter God’s laws? It is true that where we see God’s working it is according to law and order, whether in nature or in grace. But God’s law is not a blind unreasoning force, which works in a groove as a mere machine; but the free action of the intelligent will of a moral agent. Almighty God is not bound by

* Acts xvii. 28. » St. Mark xi. 24. 3 St. John xiv. 14. 4 Liddon, Some Elements of Religion, pp. 197, 198.

rules. Cannot He supersede a lower rule of working by a higher? It is true that ” the help that is done upon earth He doeth it himself,” * yet cannot He do it as He wills, unfettered by the bondage of any rules whatever? Prayer really exalts God by acknowledging that He is not the slave of his own rules of action, and that with him ” all things are possible.” a

2. A Second objection to prayer has been raised, grounded on God’s foreknowledge of events. If is said, that as everything that happens has been planned beforehand by God, it is therefore useless to pray, for prayer cannot influence God in what is already arranged by his providence. The answer to this is, that God’s dealings with us may be affected by the prayers we address to him. His providence does not interfere with our moral freedom. He has left us free to do what we will, yet He foresees how we shall act. His providence is ordered by our conduct, and why should not our prayers enter into his calculations as factors and causes, working out that final result which all along He has foreseen and allowed for? God works out his plans not merely in us, but also by us.

3. Another objection to prayer has been based on the consideration of God’s greatness, and our littleness. Is it reasonable that the Maker and Ruler of this vast universe should be expected to attend to the prayers of so insignificant a being as man? Is not God too much occupied in the ordering of his great creation, to pay attention to the desires of one of his creatures? Is not the prayer of man too trifling to be heeded by one so infinitely great

1 Ps. Ixxiv. 13. • St. Matt. xix. 26.

as God is? The reply to such questions as these is, that nothing is greater in creation than man, and that such is God’s marvelous love for everything that He has made, that the welfare of the least of his children is a matter of deep concern to him. Our Lord’s sacrifice upon the cross was made for all men, yet St. Paul could say, — “Who loved me, and gave himself for me.” x Thus, God’s providence, which is over all creation, is over every life in detail. If He clothes the grass of the field and protects the sparrows, surely, the needs of his children are not beneath his fatherly attention.2

I. THE LORD’S PRAYER.

The Lord’s Prayer, as its name implies, was composed by our Lord Jesus Christ; it is the best of all prayers, and that which the Christian should most frequently use. It comes to us hallowed by great associations. It was first uttered by the lips of our incarnate Lord, as He gave it to his Church; it is written in the Gospels; it has been used by apostles, martyrs, and saints, in all languages; it is the prayer of kings and peasants, of old men and little children; it is the prayer of the whole Church of God in all countries, and in all ages. And so the Church has specially honored the Lord’s Prayer, giving it a place in every office of the Prayer Book, and causing it to be repeated twice in the three chief services, — the Holy

x Gal. ii. 20.

* In the foregoing, the author has drawn from Liddon’s Some Elements of Religion, Lecture v.

Jather>hirh art in heaben, trespasses forgibe trespass

Eucharist, Mattins, and Evensong. The Lord’s Prayer contains God’s own statement of the needs of man; and, in using it, we have divine authority for believing that all we as-k is accord ing to the mind of God. Nine hundred years ago, the bishops under King Canute beautifully said, — * It contains a message to God regarding every need a man may have, either for this life or for that to come.’

The ‘ Our Father ‘ consists of seven petitions, which fall into one of two divisions, marked by the use of the words Thy, and us and our. The Prayer places God’s glory first, and our needs in the Second place. The seven petitions may be summarized thus: —

GOD’S GLORY. MAN’S NEEDS. We pray for, We pray for, 1. Reverence. 4. Food.

2. Loyalty. 5. Forgiveness.

3. Obedience. 6. Guidance.

” OUR FATHER, WHICH ART IN HEAVEN.”

The Lord’s Prayer is the prayer of idt baptized. It addresses God as Father, and thus can only be used by those who have been made his children in Holy Baptism, and so adopted into his family, — the Church. In the early days of the Church, no unbaptized person was permitted to say the ‘Our Father.’ Persons under preparation for Holy Baptism were in structed in its meaning, as part of such prepar ation, and learned it by heart the week preceding baptism; but they were not allowed to use

it as a prayer, until they had received that Sacrament. Thus, we find St. Augustine, in his sermon to candidates for baptism, saying, ” For how can they say the ‘ Our Father ‘ who are not yet born? ” He is referring to the new birth in baptism.

St. Augustine speaks of the Lord’s ‘Prayer as ‘the fraternal prayer.* We do not address God as ‘my Father,’ but as ‘our Father.’ If He is our Father, then we are brethren. The Lord’s Prayer is a great bond of unity, for we never say it without praying for the whole Church, thus making a great act of intercession.

i. ” HALLOWED BE THY NAME.”

The word hallow, means ‘ to account sacred,’ or ‘to reverence.’ By God’s name, we are to understand God himself, as revealed to man. His name is so used frequently in the Holy Scriptures.1 Our Lord said to his apostles, — “I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me; ” 2 by which He meant that He had revealed God to them.

By the name of God, we are also to under stand the things which concern him, such as his house, his day, his word, his sacraments, his ministers; all of which are to be treated with reverence because they belong to him. In praying “hallowed be thy name,” we ask for grace to keep the third Commandment, which forbids the taking of God’s name in vain. Christians are to sanctify everything upon which God has placed his name. The way oi

1 See Ps. xx. I; Ixix. 37. Neh.J. II. • SL John xvii. 6.

the world is to scoff at all sanctifying, and to treat all things as common. It is the duty of the children of God, who pray the Lord’s Prayer, to redeem common things, and to restore their relation to him.

ii. “THY KINGDOM COME.”

In this petition we chiefly pray that God’s rule may be everywhere accepted. That this happy result may be effected, we are first of all to be careful that the kingdom of God may come to our own souls. Of the true servants of God, Jesus Christ has said, — ” the kingdom of God is within you.”1 St. Paul writes, — ” Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body.”8 Within the soul of every man is a throne, upon which either God or sin sits as a king. We pray that God alone may occupy the throne of the heart. When this is so, we shall be able to influence others for good, and so God’s kingdom will spread in the world.

He who prays this petition should take a real interest in the Church’s missions to the heathen. If we cannot give alms, we can offer our prayers that God will bless and prosper the missionary work of his Church.

In this petition we pray for Christ’s Second coming to judgment, when all remaining enemies shall be put under his feet. Unless the kingdom has come to our hearts, we are not ready for Christ’s coming at the end of the world. As we cannot alter the Prayer, we must alter our lives, and thus be getting ready for the Second coming of our Lord.

1 St. Luke xvii. 21. • Rom. vi. 12.

Hi. ” THY WILL BE DONE IN EARTH, AS IT is IN HEAVEN.”

This is the most sacred of all the seven petitions of the Lord’s Prayer, for it was the prayer of Jesus Christ. In the Garden of Gethsemane, on the eve of his sacrifice, Jesus thrice prayed this prayer. God’s will is a wise and good -will, and nothing can really go well with us until we are yielding to, and fulfilling it. Our blessed Lord said, — ” My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.” x God’s will represents the highest good that can happen to us, for even the evils we suffer, work together for good to them that love God, and keep his command ments. Anything which is not according to his will is under a curse.

By “Thy will be done,” we not only mean that all God’s appointments of trial, or suffer ing are to be patiently borne, but also that his will may be actively carried out by us. The will of God is not only to be accepted, but it is also to be fulfilled. God has given us a free will, and we pray that in all things, great and small, our wills may follow his, choosing that which He chooses, and rejecting that which He rejects. The rule of life is the same under all circumstances, — to do God’s will as we see it.

We pray that his will may be done in earth, as it is in heaven. In heaven it is done by the holy angels, consciously and completely, cheer fully and continually.

iv. ” GlVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD.’*

This petition speaks of our dependence upon God; for, in it, we pray for all things needful for the welfare of soul and body.

We ask him for our food, and this day by day. We are apt to take our food as a matter of course, forgetting from whose hand it comes. We must remember too that our food would not nourish us apart from God’s blessing. It is a holy practice never to take our food without first asking God to bless it to our use, and ta return thanks to him after meals.

But in this petition we pray also for the food of our souls. Our Lord taught that the food of the soul is of more importance than that of the body, when He said, — ” Labor not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life.” x He is refer ring to the Sacrament of his body and blood, which He spoke of as the Bread of Life. They who do not go to Communion, are not living as they pray in this fourth petition.

v. ” FORGIVE us OUR TRESPASSES, AS WE FOR GIVE THEM THAT TRESPASS AGAINST US.”

Our Lord meant us to use the ‘ Our Father ‘ daily: we learn this from the last petition, which asks for daily bread. We are to pray too for daily forgiveness; for, however good we are, we never pass a day without falling into some sin, however small. “A just man ” saith

Solomon, ” falleth seven times.” x It was the great Augustine who taught his hearers that the earnest use of this petition obtains pardon for such daily imperfections. We do not in this petition pray for first forgiveness, but to cover the daily sins which, even in a state of grace, by our frailty we commit. St. Augustine’s words are, — “Baptism is provided on account of all sins; prayer is provided on account of little sins, without which no one is able to live. What does the Prayer say? * Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us.’ We are cleansed once for all in baptism, we are cleansed daily by prayer.” a

We pray that God will so forgive us, as we forgive others. This is the only petition in the 4 Our Father ‘ conditional upon our doing some thing. ” As we forgive,” means in like manner as we forgive. The reason why Christ has thus taught us to pray is, because we are not fit to receive mercy from God until we have shown it to others. ” Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.” 3 It has been said, * He that cannot forgive others, breaks down the bridge over which he must pass himself.”

vi. ” AND LEAD us NOT INTO TEMPTATION.”

The last petition teaches that, as sinful creatures, we need pardon: this petition teaches that, as helpless and weak, we need guidance and succour. The petition may mean either, —

1 Proy. xxiv. 1 6. * Sermon to Catechumens ‘, 15.

s St Matt. v. 7.

Do not permit us to fall into temptation, or in other words, Suffer us not to be placed in positions dangerous to our spiritual safety; in accordance with our Lord’s words, ” Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation: ” x or it may mean, — Suffer us not to be overwhelmed when tempted. It is no sin to be tempted: the sin begins when we consent to the temptation. As we use this petition, we ought to be careful not to put ourselves in the way of danger; and if danger comes, to be earnest and prompt in prayer for help.

vii. ” BUT DELIVER US FROM EVIL.”

In this petition we ask God to save us from all manner of harm both to soul and body. It is probable that our Lord meant, Deliver us from the Evil One, i.e., our great enemy; and, if so, the words include all moral evil, which is the work of the Evil One. We are quite sure that it is God’s will to save us from moral evil, or sin; for sin does the soul infinite harm. The Christian is daily subject to evils of all kinds, let him therefore pray this prayer very earnestly. It has been well said, — ‘ When prayer leads the van, deliverance brings up the rear.’ Although it is not wrong to ask God to save us from physical evil, such as pain or disease, yet it may not please him always to answer our prayer; for He often turns physical evils into real blessings, and then we should be patient, trusting that He will order all for our highest good.

3 1 6 Prayer.

” FOR THINE IS THE KINGDOM, THE POWER, AND THE GLORY, FOR EVER AND EVER. AMEN.”

These words form what is known as the doxology. They are sometimes omitted from the Lord’s Prayer in the Prayer Book. Some doubt has been expressed as to whether they form part of the Prayer as given by our Lord. They are found in the Prayer as printed in St. Matthew’s Gospel, but they are wanting in that given in St. Luke’s Gospel. But as the Lord’s Prayer was given by Christ on two occasions, He may possibly have omitted the doxology in the one case, and added it in the other.

Chapter XIX. The Christian Course

I. PREDESTINATION AND ELECTION.

ALMIGHTY God, our heavenly Father, f\^ ” worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.” He does nothing in time, which He has not “purposed in himself” in eternity. It has pleased God to make known to us his eternal purpose to “gather together in one all things in Christ.”1 The divine purpose of gathering together the elect into one body, and thus bringing them to eternal life in Christ, is called Predestination and Election.

Predestination does not mean that some souls are fore-ordained to eternal life, and others to eternal death, for there is no purpose of God to bring any man to eternal death. God “will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” 3

There is a purpose in everything, both in the order of nature and in that of grace. In the order of grace, Predestination corresponds to some extent with Providence in the order of nature. An acorn is naturally predestined to produce an oak, but it may fail to realize that purpose: all acorns do not produce oaks. If it

1 Eph. i. 9-1 1. » I Tim. ii. 4.

does fail, it misses its predestined end. So the soul is predestined to a life of grace and obedi ence here, leading to a life of glory hereafter; but it may fail, and miss the mark. If the laws which determine the germination and growth of an acorn are observed, the oak will be produced from it. In like manner if the soul obeys God, and corresponds with his grace, it will come to eternal life. God who calls and elects, also bids us “to make our calling and election sure.” x

God is “not willing that ANY should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance.” a Therefore, if any man is lost, it is of his own fault.s

God has predestinated us “to be conformed to the image of his Son,” * but no man can be conformed to the image of Christ against his own will. Hence it is said that we are ” elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” s

Sin alone, deliberately chosen, persevered in, and unrepented of, shuts out from heaven: and no man need sin unless he chooses. Nothing is accounted sin by God, unless it might have been avoided. God causes no one to sin. We

1 2 St. Peter i. 10. a 2 St. Peter iii. 9.

3 *’ * Many are called, but few chosen.’ All who are called can come, if they will: freewill is given them with that intent, nor is grace wanting to them, so that, if they come not, they have themselves only to thank for it; but if they come, it is thanks to the special impulse of God, who inspires them to make so good a use of their liberty.” — Bossuet, and his Contemporaries t 1877, p. 487.

* Rom. viii. 29. * I St. Peter i. 2.

sin because we ” frustrate the grace of God,” ‘ and ” receive the grace of God in vain.” 3 The very fact that the grace of God is offered to all men, proves that He does not will that anyone should either sin or be lost.

God does not elect all men to the same position in his kingdom. He gives to some ten talents, to others five, to others two; but He gives to all one talent, and to everyone grace to correspond to his vocation. If God bestows his grace in a way which seems to us unequal, yet to no one does He give less grace than is necessary for salvation. The lot of each soul in eternity will depend upon the use made of that grace. Everyone is called to, and is capable of salvation, but God alone knows who will ” make their calling and election sure.” 3

II. GRACE AND FREEWILL.

The soul of man is the seat of FreewilL Freewill is that great gift of God to man, whereby he is able to choose good or evil. The possession of Freewill raises man above all the creatures around him, and makes him capable of corresponding with God’s Grace. The soul would be incapable of either moral’ goodness or moral evil, unless it was free to choose one or the other. Without Freewill we should be mere machines, not moral agents created in the image of God. There could be no responsibility in the sight of God for our actions, unless our wills were unfettered. Nothing teaches more forcibly the exceeding

1 Gal. ii. 21. » 2 Cor. vi. i. 3 2 St. Peter i. 10.

blessedness and greatness of a free obedience, than the consideration that it was only possible at the risk of sin and rebellion.

By the fall, the faculties of the soul were seriously disordered, and the will became en feebled, and prone to an evil choice. To remedy this defect God bestows Grace upon the soul. Grace is that thing which by nature we cannot have. Grace is a spiritual gift of God, which makes man acceptable to him, and able to serve him. Grace enlightens the mind, cleanses the heart, and strengthens the will, uniting us with all the powers of our life to God. Grace is the free gift of God, bestowed on us for the sake of Jesus Christ, wrought in us by the Holy Ghost, to enable us to know and to do the will of God.1

The Grace of God corrects the natural bias of the will in fallen man toward evil. The “arth upon which we live is subject to two influences in its journey round the sun. Its swift movement through space gives rise to a strong tendency to wander from its appointed path. This catastrophe is prevented by the attraction of the sun upon the earth. If this

1 ” Grace is not simply kindly feeling on the part of God, but a positive boon conferred on man. Grace is a real and active force; it is, as the apostle says, ‘ the power that worketh in us’ (Eph. iii. 20), illuminating the intellect, warm ing the heart, strengthening the will of redeemed humanity. It is the might of the everlasting Spirit renovating man by uniting him, whether immediately or through the sacraments, to the sacred manhood of the Word incarnate.” — Liddon’s University Sermons, First Series, p. 44.

” Grace is power. That power whereby God works in nature is called power. That power whereby He works in the wills of his reasonable creatures is called grace.” — Mozley, on Predestination, p. 302.

attraction ceased, the earth would promptly fly off into space to its destruction. So wonderfully are these two influences balanced, that the earth preserves its proper course. It is thus with the movements of the will acting under Grace; only with this difference, that Grace does not con strain or force the will, for Grace may be re sisted. Grace attracts, persuades, and aids the will to a right choice. As St. Augustine says, — ” Not Grace alone, nor man alone, but Grace working with man, will save: ” and again ” He who cseated these without these, will not save these without these.”

When we see the lid of a casket forced open, and the hinges torn away, we look upon the work of the spoiler; but when we see the casket gently unlocked by the key, and the contents brought out, we note the hand of the owner. Grace does not work by violence in opening the heart, forcing or crushing the free action of the will. This is not the method of Him who comes not as a plunderer to his prey, but as a possessor to his treasure. The will is not blinded by Grace, but it is enlightened, and the whole man is enabled to act with ” the glorious liberty of the children of God.” ” Grace does not enslave the will, but en franchises it.2

8 ‘* The Grace of God does not make our final perseverance inevitable. It makes it possible, probable, morally certain if you will, but morally, not mechanically certain. God, who has made us free, respects our freedom; He does not crush it, even by his own merciful gifts; and Grace no more absolutely assures heaven than does natural will or the force of habit conquer the road to it.” — Liddon, Some Words of Christy viii. p. 122.

Y

III. REGENERATION.

There is much confusion in many minds con cerning Conversion and Regeneration. This confusion arises in a great measure from a mis apprehension of our Lord’s words to Nicodemus as to the necessity of the new birth, recorded in St. John iii. 1-14.

Regeneration is the being born again “of water and of the Spirit.” It is the act of God the Holy Ghost upon the soul in Baptism, — a single definite act which can never be repeated. In Baptism, God gives the soul the new birth, or, in other words, regenerates it. In Regenera tion we receive a new nature, and pass out from the natural into the supernatural order of things. This new nature is as a seed planted within the soul, and it is intended to grow and to bear fruit.1

Conversion, as we shall see in the next sec tion, consists in the conscious turning of the

1 ” We are made new creatures by a present change work ing in our moral nature; that is to say, through our regenera tion in holy baptism. By the love of God electing us to a new birth of the Spirit, and by the Holy Ghost working through that visible sacrament, we are translated from wrath to grace, from the power of darkness to the kingdom of his dear Son. Old things pass away, and all things become new around the regenerate man. We look upward to a new heaven; we stand upon a new earth…. We are brought under the shadow of the cross, within whose dominion the powers of sin are bound. We receive that thing which by nature we cannot have — a baptism not of water only, but of the Holy Ghost…. In baptism we are so made new creatures, that we may either grow daily to the sanctity of angels, or may fall, and hold our Regeneration in unrighteousness; as angels that kept not their first estate still hold their angelic nature in anguish and in warfare against God.” — Manning, Sermons, vol. i. pp. 20, 21.

will to God. It is the act of man, through grace, as he accepts the mercy and the love offered by Jesus Christ.

Thus, we see that Regeneration and Conver sion are quite distinct, since a converted man is not necessarily a regenerated man. From a comparison of Acts ix. 9, with Acts xxii. 13, 16, we learn that St. Paul was not baptized until three days after his conveision. In his case, Conversion preceded the new birth. Such too was the order in the case of St. Augustine, as we learn from his Confessions.1

St. John does not, in hi* Gospel, tell of the institution of the Sacrament of Holy Baptism, but he records a very full explanation of its meaning in the words of our Lord to Nicodemus.2 In this passage our Lord declares that, ” Except a man be born again, Re cannot see the kingdom of God; ” and He explains this statement by adding, ” Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Thus ” to be born of water and of the Spirit,” is the same as ” to be born again.” Now the joining together of ” water ” and ” the Spirit,” can only refer to baptism. To be “born of water and of the Spirit,” cannot mean “to be converted,” for the use of water has no part in Conversion. If our Lord had said, ” Except a man be born of the Spirit” only, we might have been in doubt whether He meant Conversion or not; but since He said, ” of water and of the Spirit,” there can be no doubt as to his meaning. Hooker wrote, — “Of all the ancient (writers), there is not one. to be named that ever di£ 1 Tiii. 12; ix. 6.. a St. John iii. 1-14.

otherwise expound or allege the place” (i.e., St. John iii. 5) ” than as implying external baptism.” I

St. Paul uses an expression which confirms this interpretation. In his epistle to Titus 2 he writes, ” According to his mercy He saved us, by the washing of Regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” The word here used for 1 washing,’ means a ‘ bath,’ which implies the use of water. So here again, Regeneration, or the new birth, is associated with the use of water, — the bath of the font. The first words that the priest is directed to say after baptizing a child, and receiving it into the Church, are these, — ” Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that this child is regenerate.” 3 THEREFORE,

EVERY PERSON WHO HAS BEEN RIGHTLY BAP TIZED, HAS, THROUGH THE SPIRIT, BEEN BORN AGAIN.

We must not think that because a person has been born again, he will necessarily be saved. Regeneration is not final salvation, but it places the soul in such a relation to God as to make salvation possible. The germ of the new life, implanted in the soul at baptism, needs to be cared for and developed. The new life in Christ is as a seed within the soul, which needs to be watered and tended, that it may live and grow, until sin is destroyed, and the new life is perfected. There are thus two forces at work in the soul of the regenerate man. Good and evil meet in the baptized, and one or other must in the end prevail. The issue of the conflict depends upon the will, working with, or against grace.

s Public Baptism of Infants.

IV. CONVERSION.

There are two words used in the New Testa ment, which describe the process whereby a man passes from a state of habitual sin to a state of holiness. These words are Repentance and Conversion. The first of these is most frequently used in the New Testament, but it is of the latter that we are now about to speak.

The word conversion means a ‘ turning with or toward ‘ a person, instead of a turning away from him; hence, a change of purpose. A con verted man is one who, having turned away from God, is now turned toward him. Having hidden his face from God, and walked away from him, he has now turned round, and is facing him, or walking with him. We speak of such an one as a changed man, i.e., one who has changed the aim or purpose of his life; and this great change we call Conversion. Conver sion consists in the conscious yielding of the heart, mind, and will to God. It is the willing acceptance of the mercy, truth, and love of God. Conversion may take place before baptism, lead ing a person to seek the new birth in that Sacrament; or it may take place after baptism, when one who has been born again in baptism, but has never striven to live well, may turn from evil and begin to do better. In the case of a baptized person, Conversion may be re garded as the willing acknowledgment of the baptismal vows, and the conscious acceptance of his position as the child of God by adoption and grace.

Conversion may be sudden, or it may be gradual. Sudden Conversion is the install-

taneous passage ” from darkness to light,” without any intervening twilight, — a violent change in the soul’s history. Such conversions are rare, and we may regard them as the exception rather than the rule. The case of the penitent thief, the jailer at Philippi, and that of St. Paul, fall under the head of sudden Conversion. Lacordaire, the great French preacher, in de scribing his own Conversion, said, — ” I seem to see a man who is making his way along, as it were, by chance, and with a bandage over his eyes; it is a little loosened — he catches a glimpse of the light — and, at the moment when the handkerchief falls, he stands face to face with the noon-day sun…. This touch of grace was in him so vivid that he never lost the ‘memory of it. On his death-bed he des cribed this sublime moment with just the same emotion…. Every Christian knows this state, more or less, but Conversion is not ordinarily produced in the way of sudden illumination, like a flash of lightning in a dark night, but rather under the form of growing daylight, like that which precedes the sunrise.” x

The majority of earnest people find it impos sible to say when they first consciously yielded up the heart to God. The life of such has been a succession of gentle changes and renewals, each bringing the soul nearer to him. The process of Conversion in these cases has been decidedly gradual, ” first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear.” a

I Chocarne, Life of Lacordaire, pp. 41, etc. 8 St. Mark iv. 28.

II There are ” says Canon Carter, ” in the lives of all who we sared certain turning points, when either for the first

Because a man is once converted, it does not follow that he is safe. A converted man may fall from his state of grace and salvation, and become a backslider, and so need converting Again. St. Paul was undoubtedly converted on the road to Damascus, yet he often speaks as though conscious of the possibility of falling away.1

Conversion, like Repentance, is not a solitary act, but a lifelong, continual process, a daily passing from death unto life, under the influence of the grace of God. For not until the will of man corresponds completely and perpetually to the will of God, will Conversion be really effectual. “He that endureth to the end shall be saved.”2

V. JUSTIFICATION.

Justification is the act of God upon the soul whereby He cleanses it, and endows it with righteousness by uniting it to Christ. Christ

time the soul is drawn to God, or previous drawings are sensibly deepened. They vary in degree from the gentle quickenings of a life-long piety, to the violent revolutions which take place in souls who are as brands plucked out of the burning. Such seasons can never be forgotten; they stand out prominently as landmarks in our course, on which alone the light of heaven seems to be shining, filling up the whole retrospect, and shutting out the intervening experiences of the soul. In all such cases there have been, doubtless, secret preparations of the heart, leading on, and opening the way to these critical seasons. But the eye of the soul rests only on these great points in its history, and they did, in fact, determine its conversion.” — Sermons^ 1862, p. 47.

1 i Cor. ix. 27; x. 12. Phil. iii. 12, 13.

• St. Matt. x. 22.

died to destroy the rule of the devil in us, and He rose again to send down the Holy Spirit to rule in our hearts, and to endow us with perfect righteousness.

The term Justification describes the state of man in this life as redeemed by Christ, and united to him, in contrast with his state by nature. By sin, original and actual, we are at enmity with God; by our union with Christ this enmity is done away, we are made God’s children and treated as such, and so gradually fitted for heaven. Thus, the state of Justi fication is much the same as the state of grace, i.e., the state in which God’s favor rests upon the soul, and his help assists it.

Justification is not the office of man, but of God: for man cannot make himself righteous by his own works. ” It is God that justifieth.” J Justification proceeds from the love of God, which is the first or moving cause of our Justi fication. “We love him, because He first loved us.”a We are justified by God “only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” 3 his death and passion being the meri torious cause of our Justification. God justifies us by ” the grace of Christ, and the inspiration of his Spirit.” 4 This action of the Holy Spirit is the efficacious cause of our Justification, en dowing us with perfect righteousness. The Sacraments are the instrumental cause of Justi fication on God’s part; they are the divinelyappointed instruments by which God ” doth work invisibly in us.” 5 In order that the soul may receive sacramental grace savingly, it is

s Art. xi. ” Art. xiii. s Art XXY.

necessary to approach the Sacraments with faith and repentance. If faith is the opening and stretching forth of the hand of the soul to receive God’s gift of Justification, repentance is the cleansing of that hand.

When we say that we are justified by faith and repentance, we do not mean that faith or repentance justify of themselves; but rather that they are the conditions upon which we are united to Christ by Justification. Faith apprehends and appropriates the merits of Christ, and thus it is said that we are “justified by faith.” x A holy life is the evidence of a true repentance, and of a lively faith in Christ. Justification does not mean that God regards us as holy, when we are not really so. ” They that keep holiness holily shall be justified.” a Christians who do not live according to their calling, and neglect the means of grace, throw away also the gift of Justification, and lose their salvation.

VI. SANCTIFICATION.

Sanctification is the term used to describe the work of God the Holy Ghost upon the character of those who are justified. We are justified in order that we may be sanctified, and we are sanctified in order that we may be

“This sentence, that we be justified by faith only, is not so meant, that the said justifying faith is alone in man, without true repentance, hope, charity, dread, and the fear of God, at any time and season.” — Homily of Salvation, Part ii.

glorified. ” Whom He justified, them He also glorified.” ‘

The grace of God is given to make us holy, and so to fit us for God’s presence in eternity; for “without holiness no man shall see the Lord.” 2 In Holy Baptism we are born again into a state of Justification, that we may be completely renewed. This renewal depends upon our union with Christ, the Source of holiness. Our union with Christ, — commenced in Baptism, and dependent upon the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit in the soul, — is sustained by feeding upon him in the Holy Communion of his body and blood.

. We are responsible to God for the use we make of the opportunities of Sanctification, which never fail to wait on the regenerate and justified. If we fail to use these great oppor tunities, then our Justification, like the pound laid up in a napkin and unused, becomes a witness against us in the day of judgment. God’s manifold dealings with us, in grace and providence, are the means by which the Holy Spirit, — our wills co-operating, — carries on, and perfects the work of Sanctification.

Sanctification is the consecration of the re deemed man, with all the powers of his soul and body, to the perfect and eternal service of God. “Christ loved the Church, and gave himself for it: that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that He might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” 3

VII. FINAL PERSEVERANCE. (By the Rev. T. T. Carter.)

Perseverance is the crown of all God’s deal ings with the soul in its earthly course. On God’s part, it is the perfecting of that good work which He began in regeneration.1 On the side of man, it is the continuance in that state of salvation to which baptism introduces him, and the correspondence with God’s grace, even unto the end. On this account it is named Final Perseverance.

The saying, ‘ once in grace, always in grace,’ is not necessarily true, for, as we have already said, grace may be received in vain,2 and even resisted. 3 The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of the falling away of some ” who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift,” 4 and St. John also speaks of those who ” went out from us.” *

It is therefore perilous to trust to the feeling of assurance, when all must depend on a con tinued faithfulness to grace, and a true con formity to the will of God. Such a feeling tends to self-confidence. The most confident are the most likely to be self-deceived. The very best among us has need to take to himself the apostle’s warning, “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”6 There is a ‘ holy fear,’ which it is always needful to cherish, and he that feareth is the more likely to be kept safely to the end. There is a warning that, with all our joy in a conscious state of grace, we

* Heb. vi. 4-6. s i St. John ii. 19. 6 I Cor. x. 12.

should ” rejoice with trembling.” T One of the saddest deceits of Satan is to encourage a spirit of presumption, and false peace. The humble and diffident soul may often be the surest of final salvation.

The only ground of an assured hope, while resting on the merits and precious blood of Christ, is in the faithful use of all the means of grace, and the diligent practice of good works, — “perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” 2 St. Paul could say of himself, ” I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day.”3 Although to St. Paul, because of his greatness, a special grace might be vouchsafed, such as others could hardly venture to claim, yet some measure of a like grace can hardly fail to follow a real consistency of life in union with our Lord. To faithful souls living in the grace of God, and in the honest practice of the Christian virtues, there comes a peace and a trustful looking forward to the glory that shall be revealed, — a hope full of immortality. To such is given, an increasing sense of being in God, as grace grows into habit, and evil is overcome. We may believe that to such faith ful souls, God grants a special gift of Perse verance, as they realize the promise of our Lord concerning his sheep, ” They shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” *

There is a maturity of grace, as there is a

s 2 Tim. iv. 7, 8. * St. John x. 28.

new birth in grace. God calls the soul to a gradual progress of growing life. This growth when truly maintained, through the Holy Spirit’s influence, under the discipline of life, is the intended result of God’s manifold dealings with the soul, and such growth is the truest witness to an assured redemption. But there may be alternations of nature and grace, the one or the other prevailing for the time: and there may be fallings away, and even long periods of decline. But there is a restorative power in regenerating grace, and there is a fulness of life promised to true repentance. There may be ” repentance unto life,” x and ” repentance to salvation not to be repented of,” 2 and a return to God lasting for ever, with “hope as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil.” 3 Our Lord has even said, — ” Many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first,”* for ” He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them.” 5 Thus, all past loss may be repaired, and, as our Lord assures us, ” he that endureth to the end shall be saved.” 6

There is no limit to the possibilities of divine grace, in souls made willing by the Holy Spirit of God. But Final Perseverance implies a stedfast continuance in well-doing, tried and tested under the manifold changes and chances of this mortal life.

READING FROM THE GREAT BIBLE.

The first fully authorized version.of the Bible in English, known as ‘The Great Bible,1 appeared in the year 1540. The Psalter, as now printed in the Book of Common Prayer, is taken word for word from •The Great Bible,1 as are also the Ten Commandments and the Comfortable Words in the Eucharistic Service. The Prayer Book refers to this version of the Scriptures, in the Order how the Psalter is appointed to be read, as ‘The Great English Bible.’

On its appearance, ‘ The Great Bible ‘ was ordered to be set up in all the churches. Every parish priest was directed to ‘ provide ona book of the whole Bible, of the largest volume, in English, and have the same set up in some convenient place within the church, whereat the parishioners may most commodiously resort to the same, and read it.” Copies of the Bible were then only provided at great cost; and for their safe keeping, it was the custom to fasten them by chains to pillars or desks in some accessible position in the churches. The illustration represents one of these chained Bibles. In those days the majority of people could not read, and it was not uncommon for such persons to gather round the chained Bible in the c Trkilst those who could, read aloud to the assembled hearers.

Chapter XX. The Holy Bible

A MONGST the thousands of books which £\^ have been written, the Holy Bible is by far the most important, for it contains God’s own account of hirrtself, and of his dealings with mankind in this life and in that to come. In St. Augustine’s words, “the Scriptures are Betters from our heavenly country.” The Bible is the best and most enduring book in the world; it has been translated into all languages, and circulated by millions; it has successfully resisted all attacks made upon it; it is the book which God has caused to be written for our learning, and it is his own gift to man.

Moreover, the Bible is an inspired book, and in this it chiefly differs from all other books.

I. THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.

The word inspiration, signifies ‘inbreathing,’ or ‘breathing into.’ By this term we under stand the action of God the Holy Spirit upon the minds of the writers of the Bible, whereby they were enabled to deliver in writing God’s message to man. ” Holy men of God spake as they were moved” i.e., carried along, “by”

the Holy Ghost.” * The Holy Spirit inspired the writers of the Bible, filling their minds with the truths which He willed to be made known, and impelling them to write them down. In this way the Bible is not only true as a History of England might be true, but it contains much that would never have been known unless God had revealed it, and caused it to be committed to writing. The Holy Spirit also inspired the writers of the Bible in another direction. All along the ages there had been a series of reve lations from God, and of providential dealings with mankind. Inspiration enabled the writers of the Bible to select out of this mass of reve lation such truths, and to place on record such events of history, as possessed an abiding value and a lasting interest to mankind. In speaking of the Bible as inspired, we claim that it is a certain and sure guide in all the principles of religion and morals.

It is true that in the composition of the Bible the mind of man worked, but it worked under the special guidance of God. The Bible was produced by man acting under the influence of God the Holy Spirit. ” In what way inspira tion is compatible with that personal agency on the part of its instruments, which the com position of the Bible evidences, we know not; but if anything is certain, it is this, — that, though the Bible is inspired, and therefore in one sense, written by God, yet very large portions of it, if not far the greater part of it, are written in as free and unconstrained a manner, and (apparently) with as little con sciousness of a supernatural dictation or re1 2 St. Pet. L 21.

straint, on the part of his earthly Instruments, as if He had had no share in the work. As God rules the will, yet the will is free, — as He rules the course of the world, yet men conduct it, — so He has inspired the Bible, yet men have written it. Whatever else is true about it, this is true, — that we may speak of the history, or mode of its composition, as truly as of that of other books; we may speak of its writers having an object in view, being influenced by circum stances, being anxious, taking pains, purposely omitting or introducing things, leaving things incomplete, or supplying what others had so left. * Though the Bible be inspired, it has all such characteristics as might attach to a book uninspired, — the characteristics of dialect and style, the distinct effects of times and places, youth and age, of moral and intellectual character; and I insist on this, lest I seem to forget (what I do not forget), that in spite of its human form, it has in it the spirit and the mind of God.” x

“At first sight, and judged by an ordinary literary estimate, the Bible presents an ap pearance of being merely a large collection of heterogeneous writings. Historical records, ranging over many centuries, biographies, dia logues, anecdotes, catalogues of moral maxims, and accounts of social experiences, poetry, the most touchingly plaintive and the most buoyantly triumphant, predictions, exhortations, warnings, varying in style, in authorship, in •date, in dialect, are thrown, as it seems, some what arbitrarily into a single volume…. But beneath the differences of style, of language, and of method, which are undeniably prominent

in the Sacred Books, and which appear so entirely to absorb the attention of a merely literary observer, a deeper insight will discover in Scripture such manifest unity of drift and purpose, both moral and intellectual, as to imply the continuous action of a Single Mind.” x

To this passage we may add the further words of Dr. Liddon, ” In the Bible we handle the masterpiece of the Holy Spirit set forth in human speech.” 2

II. THE CONTENTS OF THF BIBLE*

The Bible appears to be one book, but it is in reality many books bound together in one volume. In the fourth century it was called by the Latins ‘ the Divine Library,’ and by the Greeks ” the Books.’ We often speak of it as ‘the Holy Scriptures,’ i.e., the holy writings. The Bible was not written at one time, by one author, and in one place; but it was written at various times, by many persons, and in various places.

There are three main divisions of the Holy Bible, namely —

i. THE OLD TESTAMENT. ii. THE ECCLESIASTICAL BOOKS,

iii. THE NEW TESTAMENT.

» Advent Sermons, The Bible a Preparation for Hereafter t vol. i. p. 259.

3 The title ‘ Apocrypha ‘ is a short form of the Greek for ‘hidden’ or ‘secret books.’ How it came to be applied to the Ecclesiastical Books is uncertain.

The Holy Bible. 339.

i. THE OLD TESTAMENT. The word testa ment, means ‘covenant,’ or ‘agreement.’ The Old Testament contains the covenant which God made with his ancient people, the Jewish Church. Our blessed Lord spoke of the three divisions of the Old Testament under the names of “the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.” * Of these we will now speak.

(i) The Law of Moses. This portion of the Old Testament contains the first five books of the Bible, commonly known as the Pentateuch. The word signifies ‘ the five-fold volume.’ The Pentateuch consisted of a single roll divided into sections, and, for a long time, formed the Canon 2 of Jewish Scripture. The five sections of the Pentateuch are known by the names, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deu teronomy. The word Genesis, means ‘origin,’ and in this book we learn the story of the origin of the world. The word Exodus, means ‘ going out,’ for in this book we are told of the deliverance of God’s people from the Egyptian bondage. The word Leviticus, signifies ‘ pertaining to the tribe of Levi,’ and the book gives the details of the priestly duties, and the laws of sacrifice. In the book Numbers, we find the census of the chosen people. The word Deuteronomy, means ‘ the Second law,’ and in this book we find the repetition or summary of the Law of God.

The Pentateuch is followed by the Historical Books of the Old Testament, giving the history of the chosen people.

* By the term ‘ Canon of Scripture,’ we mean the collec tion of writings declared by the Church to be inspired.

(2) The Prophets. The authors of this part of the Old Testament are sixteen in number, four being known as ‘the greater prophets,’ and twelve as ‘the lesser prophets.’ The four greater prophets are Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; and hence we find their writings placed before those of the lesser prophets, being greater both in length and in importance. The prophets were men sent by God, who spoke for him in teaching, warning, and encouraging his people, and in foretelling future events, specially those concerning the coming of Jesus Christ. Thus, for example, long years before He came, Isaiah foretold his Virgin-birth; I Micah prophesied that He should be born in Bethlehem; 2 and Zechariah, that He should be betrayed for thirty pieces of silver, and be crucified; 3 while Daniel foretold his Second coming in glory/

(3) The Psalms. The third division of the Old Testament consists of the Poetical Books, and is named the Psalms, or the Psalter, from the first of these books. The other poetical books, Job, the Lamentations of Jeremiah, the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon, radiate round the Psalter as planets round the sun.

The Canonical Books of the Old Testament were collected into one whole by the Jewish Church many years before the birth of Christ. When He came, it was not to destroy the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them.s Our Lord often quoted from the Old Testament, referring to that volume as ” the Scriptures.” Speaking

a Zech. xi. 12; xii. 10. 4 Dan. vii. 9-15.

of the Old Testament, He bade his followers ” Search the Scriptures,… they are they which testify of me,” x and He added, ” the Scripture cannot be broken.”2 ” For Christians it will be enough to know that our Lord Jesus Christ set the seal of His infallible sanction on the whole of the Old Testament. He found the Hebrew Canon as we have it in our hands to-day, and He treated it as an authority which was above discussion. “3

ii. THE ECCLESIASTICAL BOOKS. About the year B.C. 300, the Hebrew Old Testament was translated into Greek at Alexandria. The trans lation appears to have been made for the benefit of those foreign-born Jews and others, who were ignorant of the Hebrew language, and who would speak Greek as their native tongue. This translation is called ‘ the Septuagint,’ a word of Latin origin meaning ‘seventy.’ It received this name from a tradition that it was made by seventy scholars in the Isle of Pharos, off Alexandria. It is from this Greek version that the writers of the New Testament generally quote; and thus is explained the variations which exist between similar passages of the Old and New Testaments in our Authorized Version, — our English Old Testament being a trans lation of the Hebrew, and our New Testament of the Greek.

In this Greek version of the Old Testament are found certain writings, coming after the Prophets, which are termed the Ecclesiastical Books, or the Apocrypha. These bo<rcs contain

1 St. John v. 39. ” Ibid. x. 35.

» Liddon, The Worth of the Old Testament ‘, p. 13.

•the history of the Jews during the interval which elapsed between the close of the prophecy of Malachi, and the coming of our Lord. They cover a period of 400 years, and form a most valuable and interesting link between the Old and New Testaments: but they Have never been received by the whole Church as of equal -authority with the Old Testament. Selections from the Ecclesiastical Books are read annually in the English Church in parts of the months of October and November.

The Sixth Article thus speaks of them, — “The other books (as Hierome, — i.e., St. Jerome, — saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine.”

In purchasing copies of the Holy Bible, it is well to see that the Apocrypha is included in *he volumes. No Bible is really complete which does not contain these books.

iii. THE NEW TESTAMENT. It. was incon sistent with the origin and dignity of the Founder of the Christian religion to write books himself. The New Testament was not written by Jesus Christ, but by certain of his followers, some years after his ascension into heaven. Like the Old Testament, it was composed under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old, forming the Second volume of God’s written Word. St. Augustine says, — “The New Testament lies hidden in the Old; the •Old Testament is made manifest in the New.”

The New Testament consists of twenty-seven

portions, and is the work of eight or nine authors. Three quarters of its contents were written by St. Paul, St. Luke and St. John. It was written quickly, in about forty years, and in this respect is a contrast to the Old Testament. It is well to remember that the books forming the New Testament were not composed in the order in which they appear in our Authorized Version. Opinions are divided as to which • of the books was first written; some consider that it was one of the Gospels, others that it was St. Paul’s first Epistle to the Thessalonians. It is generally agreed that the Gospel according to St. John was the lastwritten portion of the New Testament.

The contents of the New Testament are, — (i) The Four Gospels, written by the four Evangelists, St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John. The word Gospel, means ‘good tidings.’ An Evangelist is one who declares the good tidings. The Gospels contain the story of our Lord’s incarnate life, telling who He was, and what He said and did. But very specially do they record the events connected with his passion, death, and resurrection. While the four Gospels agree in general outline, they vary in the details given: for each of the writers regards the life of Christ from a different point of view. What one Evangelist records, another omits; what a third omits, a fourth supplies, Thus, it is only by studying the four Gospels side by side, that we learn the whole truth about our Lord’s life. There is no part of the whole Bible so precious as the Gospels, and the Church has ever honored them above every other por tion of Holy.Scripture. Two selections from

the Gospels are appointed by the English Church to be read daily throughout the year,— at the Holy Eucharist, and at Matins or at Evensong.

(2) The Acts of the Apostles, written by St. Luke as the Second part or continuation of his Gospel, forms the first history of the Church. In this book we have the record of the begin nings of the Christian Church on the Day of Pentecost. We read of what the apostles said and did immediately after our Lord’s ascension, and the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Church; then of St. Peter’s work; then of St. Paul’s wonderful conversion, of his travels as a missionary apostle, and how he planted the Church wherever he went, leaving behind him in each center clergy to carry on his work. This book gives the account of our Lord’s ad ministration of his Church or kingdom, through the Holy Ghost, from his throne in heaven.

(3) The Epistles. The Epistles, or ‘letters,’ as the word means, comprise the writings of St. Paul, St. James, St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude. Some of these letters were written to private individuals, as, for example, St. Paul’s Epistles to St. Timothy and St. Titus; others were addressed to congregations of Christians in a city or a district, such as St. Paul’s Epistles to the Romans and the Corinthians; while others again were written to the Church generally, and hence are known as the Catholic or General Epistles.

(4) The Revelation. This book contains the letters to the Seven Churches of Asia, and a series of visions made known to the aged apostleSt. John, while an exile in the Isle of Patmos,

off the coast of Asia Minor. These visions concern the relation of the Church to the world, her struggle on earth against the powers of evil,, and her final triumph in heaven.

Such is the Holy Bible. “No other book can equally avail to prepare us for that which lies before us; for the unknown anxieties and sorrows which are sooner or later the portion of most men and women; for the gradual approach of death; for the passage into the unseen world; for the sights and sounds which then will burst upon us; for the period, be it long or short, of waiting and preparation; for the throne and the face of the eternal Judge. Looking back from that world, how shall we desire to have made the most of our best guide to it! ” x

III. THE BIBLE AND THE CHURCH.

The Bible is the child of the Church, and it is as wrong as it is impossible to separate the one from the other. If the Scriptures contain the truth, the Church is “the pillar and ground”2 upon which the truth rests. For, —

(1) The Church wrote the inspired books which form the Bible.

(2) The Church separated the inspired books from other writings.

(3) The Church alone can rightly interpret the Bible.

(1) The Church wrote the inspired books which form the Bible. The Jewish Church wrote the Old Testament, the Christian Church wrote the New Testament. The truths of Christianity were revealed to the Church some years before the New Testament existed. In those early days these truths were taught by word of mouth. In order that they might be preserved in the world, the Church was again called upon to act; God inspired certain men in the Church to commit the truths of Christianity to writing. Thus, the Christian revelation was written down in the New Testament. To guard the Church from error in this important task, the aid of ‘the Spirit of truth’ was bestowed. Thus, inspiration fixed and safeguarded revelation for the ages to come.

(2) The Church separated the inspired books from other writings; in other words, the Church settled what writings formed the Bible. This is true of the Jewish Church and the Old Testament, as well as of the Christian Church and the New Testament. The books which now form the Bible were not the only writings which, at one time, claimed a place in the sacred volume. There were, both in Jewish and Christian times, other writings greatly prized, some of which were, for a time, thought to be inspired. There were also writings now placed in the Bible, which were not at first regarded as inspired. It became a matter of the greatest importance that such books as were inspired should be collected, and separated from those which were not in spired. Here again the Church was called upon to act. By the light of the Holy Spirit, the Church was enabled to select from the mass of

writings then existing, such books as had been composed under His special direction. This task, known as the fixing of the Canon of Scrip ture, was a work of many years. It is upon the authority of the Church, and upon that alone, that we know what is Scripture and what is not. There is not sufficient internal evidence in the Bible to prove the inspiration of its parts. The Bible cannot be its own witness. The Church is the “witness and keeper of Holy Writ.”1 St. Augustine uttered a great truth when he wrote, ” I should not have believed the Gospel, unless the authority of the Church had moved me.”

(3) The Church alone can rightly interpret the Bible. On the testimony of the Church we not only know what the Bible is, but also what the Bible means. As the Church first received the truths of Christianity before she committed them to writing in the New Testament, so, after that volume was written, she became its in terpreter. The Bible was sent out into the world in the hand of the Church. The Church is the organ of the Holy Spirit, and as such is the divinely-appointed expositor of the Scrip tures. We know the true meaning of the Bible by the general consent of the Church, influenced by the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Bible is the most difficult of all books to understand, for it contains the utterances of the Spirit of God, and treats of profound mysteries. St. Augustine, whose knowledge of the Bible appears in every page of his works, confessed that there were more things in the Scriptures that he did not understand, than 1 Art. xx.

those which he did. No code of written law is sufficient without a court to testify to its mean ing, and to give the right meaning with au thority in case of dispute. As the laws of the land need an interpreter in the person of the judges, so the Bible needs the voice of the Church to expound its meaning. When St, Philip asked the Ethiopian nobleman, ” Under standest thou what thou readest? ” he wisely replied, ” How can I, except some man should guide me? ” I

That every man should study the Bible for himself, putting his own meaning upon its words, cannot be a right plan; for people who do this come to opposite conclusions as to main truths, such as the Divinity of Christ, the Atonement, etc. The Bible is the word of God, but when wrongly explained it ceases to be so, and becomes instead the word of man. Without an interpreter the Bible becomes a cause of angry disputes and unseemly wrangling.

Upon this subject Dr. Liddon has wisely said, — ” In order to make good use of the Bible, a humble and sensible man will take a guide. In this Book of books, God’s ‘ righteousness standeth like the strong mountains; ‘ His judg ments are like the great deep* (Ps. xxxvi. 6). Wise people do not try to climb the Alps alone, or go to sea in a skiff without a compass. If the Bible were a mere human book, we might easily explore its heights and depths for our selves; but precisely because it is superhuman, we may easily lose ourselves in the attempt to explore it. He who gives us the Bible, gives us, in the voice of that early undivided Christian

Church, a guide to its meaning. In her Creeds, and in the general sense of her great teachers, we find a clue to the real unity and drift of Scripture.” I

If, in answer to all this, the objection be raised that the Church herself is not agreed as to the meaning of certain passages of Holy Scripture, we reply: — Differences of opinion undoubtedly exist in the Church, but not in regard to that which is necessary to salvation. On minor points of interpretation there are differences, but not as to main truths. In things essential to the salvation of the soul, the Holy Catholic Church all along the centuries has ever spoken clearly and without contradiction. The foundation truths of Christianity have been accepted in the Church Always, Everywhere, and by All (see page xvi.).

“When the Fathers say, We are to rely upon Scripture only, they are never to be understood with exclusion of Tradition, in what causes soever it may be had. Not but that the Scripture is abundantly sufficient, in and to itself, for all things, but because it is deep, and may be drawn into different senses, and so mistaken, if any man will presume upon his own strength, and go single without the Church.” — Archbishop Laud’s Conference with Fisher, xvi. 33.

HIGH ALTAR AND REREDOS OF ST. PAUL’S CATHEDRAL.

Chapter XXI. Worship

THE word worship, signifies ‘ worth -ship,’ and when applied to God, means the giving to him the honor of which He is worthy. ” Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” l

Divine worship may be private or public. Public worship is the offering of united homage to God as a Great King by his subjects, the members of his Church. While He accepts the worship of each individual or family, He loves more the public worship of his Church. ” The Lord loveth the gates of Sion more than all the dwellings of Jacob.” a

The true idea of worship is that of an offering made by the creature to the Creator. This being so, the primary object in going to a place of worship is to give and not to get. The hear ing of sermons, however useful the custom may be, is no necessary part of divine worship. It 1 Rev. iv. ii. • Ps. Ixxxvii. i.

is usual to take advantage of the assembling of the people to impart to them instruction and exhortation; but worship, strictly speaking, is distinct from such exercises.

That the English Church takes a right view of the relative importance of worship and preaching, is evident from the fact that while she provides four public services, — Mattins, Litany, the Holy Eucharist, and Evensong, — the Sermon is only ordered at one of the four,.namely at the Holy Eucharist.

THE CHURCH’S CHIEF ACT OF WORSHIP is

THE CELEBRATION OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST. THIS IS THE ONE SERVICE APPOINTED BY OUR

LORD JESUS CHRIST. A GREAT FESTIVAL, OR

LORD’S DAY PASSED WITHOUT TAKING PART IN THIS SUPREME ACT OF CHRISTIAN WORSHIP IS NOT SPENT ACCORDING TO THE DIVINE INTENTION.

Mattins and Evensong, services appointed by the Church, are adjuncts to the Eucharistic Service, not substitutes for it. The use of the collect from the Eucharistic Service at Mattins and Evensong, connects the latter services with the former. Moreover, the richness and beauty of the Psalms, Canticles, and Prayers, used at Mattins and Evensong, can only be fully realized, by regarding these services in their true relation to the One Service of divine appointment. It is therefore evident that attendance at Mattins and Evensong cannot be accounted as a lawful substitute for par ticipation in the Eucharistic Service.

Worship being the offering of the creature to the Creator, it necessarily follows that it should be of the very best. The instinct of the Church from the first has recognized this principle, and thus we find that she has all along, according to opportunity, offered to God the choicest gifts of nature and of art. The Church also lays down carefully considered rules as to the ceremonies of divine worship, believing that no detail in the service of her King is too trifling to be con sidered.

While thus ordering outward things, the Church has ever insisted on the necessity of a worship in which the soul bears a real and serious part. God, who ordered an elaborate ceremonial for his ancient Church, is repre sented by the prophet Isaiah (i. 10-16) as hating such a worship, when unaccompanied by devo tion of heart and holiness of life. But we must remember that the abuse of a thing is no argu ment against its right use.

When heaven was opened to St. John the Divine, and he was permitted to see the worship above, he described, in symbolical language, a worship of which beautiful ceremonies formed an important part. No worship can possibly be more spiritual than that of heaven. We cannot therefore do wrong in making the heavenly worship thus described our model; for the worship of the Church below is offered to the same God, and, moreover, it forms our preparation for joining in the worship of heaven in eternity.

2 *

In speaking upon this subject Dr. Liddon wrote, — ” Religion, in order to meet the wants of human nature, will take account of each element in man’s nature: she will maintain lower relations with the bodies as well as higher relations with the souls of men. As man has, besides his unseen person, an outward and visible shape, so will religion herself provide sensible forms as well as supersensuous reali ties. She will exact outward as well as inward reverence, because in a being constituted like man, the one is really the condition of the other. There are bodily postures which absolutely for bid heavenly exercises to the soul: to lounge in an arm-chair is inconsistent with the tension of thought and will which belongs to adoration of tha Most Holy.1 Religion, like man himself, is a beautiful spirit tabernacling in a body of sense. Her divine and immutable truths are shrouded beneath the unrivalled poetry of Bible language; her treasures of grace beneath the outward and visible signs which meet us in sacraments. She proclaims the invisible by that which meets the eye; she heralds the eternal harmonies by a music that falls upon the ear. She certainly is not all form, for man is not a brute: but also she is not all spirit, for man is not an angel. She deals with man as being precisely what he is,

1 “The reverence of the soul is best secured when the body, its companion and instrument, is reverent also. To see God is to feel it to be an imperious necessity to prostrate ourselves before him. *O come, let us worship and fall down, and kneel before the Lord our Maker’ (Ps. xcv. 6), is the voice of true reverence for all time.” — Liddon, Easter Sermons, xxyiii. p. 13?,,

and she enlists the lower faculties of his being in aid of the higher. Yet if she is true to man and to herself, she never allows her disciple to forget the unseen in the seen, the inward in the outward, the soul in the body. For religious purposes, the soul must always be incomparably of the highest importance, as being the very man himself; the man in the secret recesses of his being; the man at the imperishable center of his life; the man as he lives beneath the eye, and enters into relation with the heart of his infinite Creator.” x

I. THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC.

In the Prayer Book, immediately before the Order for Morning Prayer, is found the following direction, known as the Ornaments Rubric: —

And here is to be noted, That such Ornaments of the Church, and of the Ministers thereof at all times of their Ministration, shall be retained, and be in use, as were in this Church of Eng land by the authority of Parliament, in the Second year of the reign of King Edward VI.

This rubric contains the directions of the English Church in many important particulars concerning the conduct of her services.

During the Commonwealth in England, the Church’s directions as to ceremonial were 1 Some Elements of Religion, 3rd Edition, pp. 116, 117*

THE ORNAMENTS RUBRIC.

SOME “ORNAMENTS OF THE CHURCH AND OF THE MINISTERS THEREOF.”

The illustration above represents a priest and a clerk vested, and an altar furnished, in accordance with the directions of the Book of Common Prayer, as given in the Ornaments Rubric. See page 355.

generally disobeyed. This disorder has con tinued in many particulars even to our own times. Slowly, yet increasingly, the Church is recovering her lost heritage in the matter of ceremonial.1

Persons are often perplexed, and naturally so, at the diversities of ceremonial prevailing in our midst. At some churches they find the Holy Eucharist celebrated by a priest in vestments, with lights on the altar, and other accessories. At other churches they find an absence of such usages. The reason for this state of things is, that in the one case the clergy are obeying the directions of the Ornaments Rubric, while in the other case past disuse or prevailing custom is pleaded for disregarding these directions.

n.

The rubric orders THE RETAINING and THB USE of ” such Ornaments of the Church, and of the Ministers thereof at all times of their Minis tration, as were in this Church of England by the authority of Parliament, in the Second year of the reign of King Edward VI.

There are several sources from which we may learn what ‘ ornaments ‘ are here alluded

1 The following statistics, taken from the Tourist’s Church Guide for 1901, show a remarkable increase in important matters of ceremonial during a period of ten years.

Eastward Position Eucharistic Vestments.. Altar Lights..

Number of Churches in which used.

1,662

7,400 2,168 4,747

Incense…

to. The chief of these sources are: (i) The First Prayer Book of Edward VI., (2) The injunctions of Edward VI., (3) The lists of ornaments which were made by the King’s instructions in 1552, for the survey of the Church goods throughout the kingdom. The Salisbury missal and other old Service-books, which were in use during the whole of the year in question,1 may also be consulted as throwing light upon the authorities named above. For instance, where an alb and chasuble are ordered in the First Prayer Book of Edward VI., the use of a girdle, amice, and stole, is implied; since these accessories always accompanied the alb and chasuble under the Salisbury missal. From a long list, the following are selected:

ORNAMENTS OF THE CHURCH.

The Altar, with its Candlesticks, Cross, and

Coverings. Paten and Chalice. Cruets for wine and water. Font. Pulpit.

ORNAMENTS OF THE MINISTERS.

The Eucharistic Vestments, viz.:

Alb and Vestment, i.e., Chasuble, for the celebrant.

Albs and Tunicles, for the assistants. Cope. Surplice.

Rochet, Pastoral Staff, and Mitre, for bishops. 1 Jan. 28, 1548, to Jan. 27, 1549.

It will be observed that most of these * orna ments of the church, and of the ministers,’ are for use at the Holy Eucharist. This being the only service of divine appointment, it is specially honored in the matter of ceremonial: the Church thereby bearing witness to the truths of the Real Presence and the Eucharistic Sac rifice.

II. THE LITURGICAL COLOURS.

Those who follow the course of the Church’s worship welcome all appropriate aids to joining in it intelligently. It would be a serious loss if the church itself should always present the same uniform appearance; and it is a corres ponding help when the alternation of fast and festival is made visible to the eye. It would be unnatural, for example, if, in passing from Holy week to Easter, no difference was made in the outward appearance of the church and the vestures of the ministers. It is with a view to marking such reasonable difference, that, from remote times, the employment of various liturgical colours has been adopted. Such a custom was in use in the English Church in the Second year of the reign of Edward VI.

In the middle ages, there was no such hard and fast rule about the various shades and tints of colours as we now have. For example, when the rubric ordered black, it was thought to be followed if violet, or purple, or even blue, was used. So with green; it was considered to be liturgically the same as yellow; both were therefore employed after Trinity and for Con fessors’ days.

Certain colours are used for certain times: white, on the Feast of the Consecration or Dedication of a church; but the color for the festival of the patron saint of a church is simply the color of the Saint’s day; if an Apostle, Evangelist, or Martyr, red: if a Confessor, yellow or green: if a Virgin, white; if the Virgin be a Martyr, some dioceses used white mingled with red. White is the color for the administration of Baptism and Confirmation, for Marriage, and Churching of women. Violet, for the Visitation and Communion of the sick, the Commination Service, and other penitential offices. Black or violet, for the Burial of the dead. White may be used for the Burial of children under seven years of age.

The pre- Reformation sequence of colours in the diocese of Salisbury is still very imperfectly known. Bishop John Wordsworth recently published the following restoration: —

” In country churches two colours will be found sufficient, Red and White. Red for ordin ary Sundays and Saints’ days and ferial days generally, and White for the great Festivalseasons in which we celebrate our Lord’s work of redemption, and for certain other great days.

” To put this rule more distinctly: —

” Red may be used on all days with the fol lowing exceptions:

” White (i) from the evening of December 24th to January 6th, both inclusive, or, if it is preferred, up to Candlemas (February 2nd) or Septuagesima, whichever falls earliest.

” (2) in Eastertide, including Whitsun week.

” (3) on January 25th, February 2nd, March 25th, June 24th, August 6th, September 29th,

November ist, and the anniversary of the Dedication of a church: also (if thought fit) at Marriages and Confirmations.

” Certain other colours may be optional, such as Violet or Purple for week-days (not being Saints’ days) in Advent and Lent, for seasons of fasting, such as Ember and Rogation days, and for parochial missions and funerals; and Blue or Green for week days (not being Saints* days) after Trinity.”

The Sarum colours have no authority outside the old diocese of Sarum, and they should not be followed even in dioceses where the Sarum liturgy was adopted; for in those dioceses it is known, that the Sarum ceremonies were not followed, but only the Sarum rules in saying and singing.

The ancient sequence in the diocese of Bath and Wells is a little better known than that of Salisbury. It is not unlike that of Sarum. Blue was used for Advent; white from Christ mas to the octave of the Epiphany; St. John’s day was blue and white; the Innocents’, red: the Circumcision, red and white. From the octave of the Epiphany to Septuagesima red was worn. From Septuagesima to Passion Sunday it seems likely that blue was used, but it is uncertain. Red was worn from Passion Sunday to Advent, with the exception of Low Sunday and the octave of the Ascension, when white was worn. As elsewhere, Apostles and Martyrs were red; Virgins not Martyrs, white; and Confessors, blue and green. Funerals were to be in black.

At Lichfield, red was used for the last fortnight of Lent, and white at Easter, apparently includ-

ing Whitsuntide. Black was the color for Advent, Lent, and for funerals.

At Westminster Abbey, there was a note worthy sequence, not unlike the old Parisian sequence of 1666. White was worn from Advent Sunday to Candlemas or Septuagesima, which ever fell first: from Septuagesima to the first Sunday in Lent a reddish color (subrubeus) was used: the first four weeks of Lent were kept in black, and the last fortnight in red. This color was then used through Easter up to the following Advent, with the exception of Ascensiontide which was kept in white, and Whitsuntide which might be kept in red, yellow, or green. As in other sequences, Apostles and Martyrs were red; Virgins, white; and Con fessors, yellow or green.1

III. Pious CUSTOMS.

i. To kneel for prayer; to stand for praise; to sit for instruction. Kneeling and standing signify humility and resolution. We sit for instruction; but an exception is made while the Holy Gospel at the Eucharist is read, at which we stand. At the reading of all other Scriptures in church we sit.

ii. To bow the head as an act of reverence: —

First, toward the altar on entering and

on leaving a church. This is done on the

recommendation of Canon VII., passed by

1 The above is reprinted, with certain abbreviations, from The Churchman’s Oxford Kalendar% by kind permission of the editor, Dr. J. Wickham Legg.

Convocation in 1640, — “We heartily commend it to all good and well-affected people, that they be ready to tender unto the Lord their reverence and obeisance [i.e. bow or curtsey] both at their coming in and going out of church, according to the most ancient custom of the Primitive Church in the purest times.” From very early days the altar has been regarded as the throne of Christ, because He there vouchsafes his sacramental presence in the Holy Eucharist. We do not bow to the cross upon the altar, but toward the altar, in honor of him, whose it is.

In the House of Lords, when the sovereign is present, sitting upon the throne, subjects kneel and do homage; when the throne is vacant, they bow in passing it.

Secondly, when the name of Jesus is mentioned. This is done in carrying out the spirit of St. Paul’s words, ” In the name of Jesus every knee should bow.”1 The Church of England en joins this practice in Canon XVIII. of 1604, — ” When in time of Divine Service the Lord Jesus shall be mentioned, due and lowly reverence shall be done by all persons present.” We bow at the name of Jesus, because it is our Lord’s human name which proclaims his mercy to mankind.

Thirdly, at the words, ” Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost,” in honor of the blessed Trinity, before whose presence the angels cover their faces.2

Fourthly, at the words, ” And was incarnate,” in the Nicene Creed, in the Communion Service, in remembrance of the great humility of the Son of God in becoming man.

Fifthly, at the words, “This is my Body,.. „ This is my Blood,” in the prayer of consecration in the Communion Service, as an act of adora tion to our Lord, then sacramentally present under the forms of bread and wine. ” No man eats this Flesh, unless he first adores.” x ” It is to be given to the people kneeling; for a sin it is not to adore when we receive this Sacra ment. And the old custom was to receive it after the manner of adoration.” 2

iii. To make the sign of the cross with the right hand from the forehead down to the breast, and from the left shoulder across to the right. This may be done as an act of faith in Jesus Christ, who came down from heaven to earthv descended into hell, and thence rose again to ascend to the right hand of the Father. In Canon XXX. of 1604 the lawful use of the sign of the cross in Baptism is carefully explained. The holy sign may be made at other times also. As early as A.D. 200, Tertullian wrote, — “At every going in and out,… in all the ordinary actions of daily life, we trace upon the forehead the sign of the cross.”

IV. THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE LAITY.

In both Jewish and Christian times there has always been a clear distinction between the clergy and the laity, in that the clergy are ” taken from among men and ordained for men in things pertaining to God.” 3 Nevertheless,.

* Bishop Sparrow’s Rationale upon the Book of Commot* Prayer; 1684, p. 218. 3 Heb. v. I.

it lias -ever t>een held that the laity have a real share in the priestly work of the Church.1

Thus, while the family of Aaron only had the ministerial priesthood,2 yet the whole people of Israel were regarded as priests. God declared, “Ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. “3 In the Christian Church the same principle is observed, for we find St. Peter speaking of Christians in general as ” an holy priesthood,” and again as “a royal priesthood,”* and St. John says that our Lord ” hath made us kings and priests unto God.” 5

The question has been raised as to whether the priesthood of the laity is conferred in Baptism, or in Confirmation. Some writers have held that the baptized are consecrated to the lay-priesthood by the laying on of the bishop’s hand, or by the anointing,6 in Con firmation. But the question is difficult of solution, from the fact, that, for the first thou sand years of the Church’s history, the two sacraments were administered together. The early Church knew nothing of Confirmation apart from Baptism.

While none but a priest may consecrate the Holy Eucharist, yet the laity co-operate with him in offering this great sacrifice. In i Cor.

1 In the language of Justin Martyr (A. D. 1 50), Christians -are ” the genuine high-priestly race of God.” Irenaeus (A.D. 175), a strong upholder of the truth of the apostolic -succession of the ministerial priesthood, does not scruple to •declare that “every just man is of the priestly order,” and that ” all the disciples of the Lord are priests.”

3 Exod. xix. 6. < I St. Peter ii. 5, 9. $ Rev. i. 6.

6 It was the custom from the earliest times to anoint persons with oil in Confirmation, and this is the practice of the Roman and Eastern Churches at the present time.

xiv. 1 6, St. Paul writes, — “Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks (literally * eucharist ‘)? ” The blessing here spoken of is that of the bread and wine in the Holy Eucharist, the * Amen ‘ being that pronounced at the close of the con secration prayer by the laity, wno thus joined in the priestly act.

” It is an abuse of the sacerdotal conception, if it is supposed that the priesthood exists to celebrate sacrifices and acts of worship in the place of the body of the people or as. their substitute…. The Church is one body: the free approach to God in the Sonship and priesthood of Christ belongs to men as members of ‘ one body,’ and this one body has different organs through which the functions of its life find expression…. The reception, for instance, of Eucharistic grace, the approach to God in Eucharistic sacrifice, are functions of the whole body. * We bless the cup of blessing,’ 1 we break the bread/ says St. Paul, speaking for the community: ‘we offer,’ ‘we present,’ is the language of the liturgies. But the ministry is the organ — the necessary organ — of these functions. It is the hand which offers and distributes; it is the voice which consecrates and pleads. And the whole body can no more dispense with its services than the natural body can grasp or speak without the instrumentality of hand and tongue.” J

In all the people’s part in worship generally, there is a recognition of the duties and privileges

x Gore’s Ministry oj the Christian CAurcA, 2nd Edition, pp. 85, 86.

of the laity, as entitled to take part in offerings made specially by the priest. This implies and rests on the truth that the laity are “an holy nation,” chosen and taken up by baptism into a sphere higher than their natural state.

” Our Lord Jesus Christ made the first day of the week in a special sense his own, by rising from the dead on it, and by connecting it with his first six appearances after his resurrection. The Christian motive for observing the Lord’s Day is the resurrection of Christ from the dead.

” The first principle embodied in the Lord’s Day is the duty of consecrating a certain pro portion of time, at least one seventh, to the especial service of God.

” A Second principle is the periodical suspen sion of human toil. This is closely connected with that of the consecration of time. In order to make the day, by this prohibition, unlike other days; in order to make room for the acknowledgment of God in it; ordinary occu pations are suspended.

“The third principle is the public worship of God. The cessation of ordinary work is not enjoined upon Christians only that they may while away the time, or spend it in aimless selfpleasing, or in something worse. The Lord’s Day is the day upon which our Lord Jesus Christ has a first claim. In the Church of

Christ the first duty of a Christian is, like the holy women and the disciples, to seek to hold converse with our risen Lord. A well-spent Lord’s Day should always begin with that supreme act of Christian worship, in which we meet Jesus verily and indeed; the only public service known to the early and apostolic Church; the most holy sacrament of the body and blood of our Redeemer. A Christian of the first or Second century would not have under stood a Sunday in which, whatever else might be done, the Holy Communion was omitted; and this great duty is best complied with as early in the day as possible. Not that it is wise or reverent to suppose that all the religious duties of a Sunday can be properly discharged before breakfast, and that the rest of the day may be spent as we like. No Christian whose heart is in the right place will think this. Later opportunities of public prayer and of instruction in the faith and duty of a Christian will be made the most of, as may be possible for each. Especially should an effort be made on every “Sunday in the year to learn some portion of the will of God more perfectly than before; some truth or aspect of his revelation of himself in the Gospel; some Christian duty, as taught by the example or the words of Christ. Without a positive effort of this kind a Sunday is a lost Sunday: we shall think of it thus in eternity.

“When the religious obligations of Sunday have been complied with, there are duties of human brotherhood which may well find a place in it: kind deeds and words to friends, visits to the sick, acts of consideration for the poor, are in keeping with the spirit of the day.

Above all, it should be made a bright as well as a solemn day for children; first solemn but then and always bright, so that in their after-life they may look back on the Sundays of childhood as its happiest days.”

VI, NOTES ON THE CHURCH OFFICES. l i. THE PUBLIC BAPTISM OF INFANTS.

1. Children should be brought to Holy Bap tism as early as possible. The Church recom mends even the first or Second Sunday after birth. The fear is lest some sudden illness should carry them off unbaptized. It is not necessary for them to be kept back until the mother’s recovery.

2. A Baptism should always be at either Morning or Evening Prayer. It ought to be public, because it is the reception of a new member into the flock of Christ; and also in order that the child may have the benefit of the prayers of the congregation, on which account, a Sunday affords the best opportunity.

3. None should delay for want of good clothes. People are ‘decent’ when they are clean, and come in the best they have. For such, however, as are shy on this account, a week-day Evensong furnishes an opportunity when few would observe them, and those few would sympathize. But there is nothing to be ashamed of.

4. It is seemly that the father should be present.

5. Sponsors should, strictly speaking, be communicants. It is of no use to bring, for sponsors, persons who are not confirmed, or are not Church people, or lead bad lives, or are not likely to pray for those for whom they answer at the font. By the sanction of the Con vocation of Canterbury, parents are allowed to stand for their own children. •

6. It should be understood that sponsors do not answer for themselves, but for the children. Baptism is a covenant, and both God and the children make an agreement: but, because the children cannot speak or understand, their sponsors speak for them.

7. Members of the Church perform a great act of charity when they undertake the sponsorial office; and if they cannot otherwise benefit their charges, they can always pray for them. “O God, bless my God-children,” is soon said, but it may effect very much. And occasionally, if not constantly, they may be more specially brought before God by name.

8. At the font the sponsors should give the answers firmly, without being told to do so.

9. When the priest says, ” Name this child,” not only the person who holds it, but all the sponsors should very distinctly pronounce the Christian name, for which purpose they should always be told the name beforehand/ The surname, or family name, should never be pronounced; the child does not want that name giving, for it comes into the world with it.

10. At the Baptism, the child’s head should be bared, to avoid the wetting of the head-dress.

1 1. The child is signed on the forehead with the sign of the cross. The Church defends this practice in her XXXth Canon, and says that the primitive Christians (which is undeniable) used it in all their actions. And, certainly, if it be neither wrong nor superstitious on this occasion, it is difficult to see how it can be so on other occasions also.

12. There is no fee or charge for Baptism. To exact a fee would be to commit the sin of selling a sacrament, which conveys the grace of God. Of course there is nothing to hinder such as are of ability making a gift, if they are so disposed.

13. The Baptism of a grown-up person can not take place at the same time as that of a child. When any who are come to years of discretion desire to be baptized, notice should be given to the clergy, that they may be pro perly instructed and prepared.

ii. THE CHURCHING OF WOMEN.

1. This custom among Christians corresponds with the Purification of Women after child-birth among the Jews, which was of divine command.

2. While in Jewish times the purification of the mother after child-birth was the prominent idea, in Christian times that of thankgiving for preservation at a very dangerous time is specially insisted on, as the title of this office in the Prayer Book teaches.

3. It goes by the name of Churching, because it takes place at the mother’s first visit to the church after her delivery.

4. God’s House should always be the first house she enters. In some parts of the country the neighbors would not allow her to enter their houses until she had first been to church ‘ to pay her vows.’

5. Israelitish mothers had to go to the temple at Jerusalem for this purpose, no matter in what part of the holy land they lived, — often, therefore, at great cost and inconvenience. Christian mothers now-a-days should therefore think but little of any slight trouble they may be put to.

6. This short office should take place im mediately before a public service. But the clergy should be told before such service begins, lest the proper time pass by.

7. The Prayer Book says that the woman “shall come decently apparelled.” This does not refer to the quality of her clothing; for it does not matter how poor it is, if it be clean. But it points to the old custom of wearing a veil on this occasion, which it may not now be de sirable to enforce. It does however lend the sanction of the Church to the practice of wear ing veils, as garments of a religious character, at Confirmations, and at other times.

8. As soon as the clergy take their places in church, the woman should step forward, and kneel down at the chancel-step, where the office will be said for her, as being the most ‘con venient place.’

9. She should have a Prayer Book with her, with the proper place found, that she may join in the office intelligently.

10. When the office is finished, “the woman, that cometh to give her thanks, must offer accustomed offerings.” For a poor person the smallest sum is sufficient; but it is a suitable occasion for those who are of ability to enlarge their gifts. Under the Jewish Law, the mother offered a lamb and a dove; but if she was very poor, then two doves were sufficient, without the more costly lamb.

n. It is better to have the gift ready, in the hand, so that it may easily be put into the plate or bag, or on the book, when the priest presents it. It embarrasses the woman if she has, at that time, to get it out of her pocket or purse. The priest takes it to the altar, to offer it as a thank-offering to God; and she should not rise from her knees until he comes away from the altar.

12. ” If there be a Communion, it is con venient (that is, suitable) that she receive the Holy Communion,” to dedicate herself to God afresh, and to seek his grace for her new duties; but she may not receive the Blessed Sacrament until she has been churched. It is well, when possible, to be churched just before some celebration of Holy Communion; or, if not, to embrace the earliest opportunity of communicating.

13. It is desirable that the husband should accompany the wife to church at these times, to join in thanking God for her safety.

14. In placing this office immediately after the Burial Service, the Church seems to regard a safe delivery in the light of a resurrection from the dead.

iii. HOLY MATRIMONY.

1. St. Paul says that marriage should be con tracted ” only in the Lord.” They who intend to marry should consider what God will approve, and what will be for the safety and benefit of their souls.

2. None, therefore, should make a choice which, they have reason to believe, will hinder instead of strengthening them in their religious life, and in their faithfulness to the Church of God.

3. In Holy Matrimony man and wif£ are made ” one flesh: ” and to those who come rightly disposed, high grace is given through the prayers and blessings of the Church, to consecrate their union, and to enable them to discharge their responsibilities. This is what the Church intends us to understand when, in one of the homilies, she calls this ordinance ” the Sacrament of Matrimony.” In arranging the details of the actual marriage, the aim should be to receive the Church’s blessing right religiously and well.

4. Plainly then, we ought to look with dis approval upon marriages at a Registrar’s Office. (See page 300.)

5. It is best to be married in one’s own parish church. Indeed, it is not strictly legal to be

married in any other church: but the irregularity, though contrary to law, would not invalidate a marriage. One, however, can hardly imagine thoughtful persons desiring to be married by clergy who are strangers to them, and not by their own pastors, at whose hands they receive all other means of grace.

6. Care should be taken to break no rule of the Church in the time chosen for marriages. They should never take place in Lent: Advent, because of its penitential character, is not a desirable season. Fridays should, of course, be avoided, and all other fast-days, such as the vigils before festivals, the Ember and Rogation Days. Before fixing the time, it is well to consult a calendar; to see what days are un suitable. (See page 252.)

7. The old-fashioned mode of being married by banns is best. The money saved by richer people in not having to purchase a license, might be put to excellent use, — as in gifts to the poor.

8. The Church prefers that a wedding should not be (as it were) in secret, as if the parties were ashamed of it. She says, “they shall come into the body of the church with their friends and neighbors,” that they may be witnesses, and join in the prayers. Never theless, persons who prefer it may be married with as much privacy as they please, providing that no law is broken.

9. The wedding party, be it great or small, should be composed of persons who are sure to behave themselves with becoming seriousness.

10. The first part of the service is called the betrothal. It is to take place, not in the chancel, but in ” the body of the church.” The bride and bridegroom, with the chief bridesmaid and groomsman, take their places at the step outside the chancel, the rest of the party being placed behind them. Men’s hats should at once be put aside, and the gloves of the pair to be married taken off and given to their attendants; and, when the priest draws near, all should kneel, as before any other religious service.

11. As the service proceeds the priest says, ” Who giveth this woman to be married to this man “? and he is to receive her ” at her father’s or friend’s hands.” It is a pity that the father himself does not always attend for this purpose. It was formerly so established a rule, that who ever else discharged this duty was always called 1 the father ‘ on the occasion.

12. Soon after this, the ring, along with the dues, is to be placed on the priest’s book; the object being, that he may privately ask God to bless the ring to her who shall wear it.

13. When the priest says, ” Those whom God hath joined together let no man put asunder,” all except himself are kneeling, and should remain kneeling. At this time he is to join their right hands together.

14. Soon after this comes the first blessing, which is one of wonderful beauty. It adds greatly to its solemnity when it is accompanied, as all benedictions should be, with the im position of the priest’s hands. In view of this, a veil, though not necessary is the woman’s

most appropriate head-dress. Since a bishop or priest only can bless authoritatively, a deacon should never be asked to perform the marriage ceremony.

15. After this blessing comes the Second part of the service, which, as it implores the graces needed for the married state, may be called the more sacramental portion. It* is to be said in the chancel, and is commenced by a psalm, which “the Minister or Clerks shall say or sing,” as they pass up to the altar. It is one of the occasions on which the Church authorizes processional singing.

1 6. After the prayer there is a Second bless ing, as beautiful as the first.

17. The whole office may be closed, either by an address, which need consist of no more than a few words of advice, or by the appointed recitation of Scriptural counsel to married people.

1 8. The final rubric is, ” It is convenient (that is, suitable) that the new-married persons should receive the Holy Communion at the time of their marriage, or at the first oppor tunity after their marriage.” If there be a celebration of the Holy Eucharist at the time, the short sermon would naturally come after the Nicene Creed. But none should com municate at a wedding except such of the friends as have given in their names before hand, and only before the wedding-breakfast. Or a celebration of the Holy Eucharist might be arranged for an earlier hour than the actual marriage service.

iv. THE BURIAL OF THE DEAD.

1. We come now to the Burial Office, the last office, excepting the continual remembrance of the faithful departed in prayer and at the cele bration of the Holy Eucharist, which our Mother Church performs on behalf of her children. It concerns them as still members of the same Body, though departed this life. May we all so live that, at our departure, it may be used for ourselves in all the confidence of a holy hope!

2. The idea of the Burial Office is a high7 one. It is framed for a Christian who has lived and died in the faith, fear, and love of Christ, and in full communion with his Church. Its general tone is therefore very joyous. It has indeed its sombre side in the psalms and in the first cry at the grave; but in every other portion it seems to say to the mourner, ” Thy brother shall rise again.”

3. In all particulars, the gloom, which was formerly considered so appropriate and was so fashionable, should be carefully avoided.

4. Never, if possible, let the coffin be black. Much more suitable designs for coffins may now be had, than was the case formerly.

5. A praiseworthy determination is being manifested throughout the country to cut down unnecessary expenses, which, under the circum stances, are often found so burdensome. We show the most real respect for the dead, when we do what we believe is sensible and right, even if at first we have to be somewhat singular in paving the way for improvements.

6. Remember always to take your Prayer Book to a funeral. When you take your place in church, kneel down, as before any other service, for private prayer. Be ready to rise, without being told, when the psalm begins, and join quietly in the responses. Others will follow your example. Avoid the foolish and unmean ing habit of leaning forward, and burying the face in the hands as you sit.

7. In the churchyard, do your best to repress all talking. And do not press forward to look into the grave; this habit is very unbecom ing. Let the immediate mourners have quiet possession of the grave-side; when they have retired, you may take a last look at the restingplace of your friend.

8. It is much to be desired that all would join intelligently and devoutly in the closing prayers, which are so moving and solemn, of course responding, all the men uncovering their heads.

9. The solemnity, as well as the consolation, is immensely heightened, when the service can be choral; and arrangements for some singing might frequently be made, when desired.

10. Still more desirable is a special celebra tion of the Holy Eucharist for the repose of the soul of the departed, as well as for the comfort of those who survive. One of the prayers of the Burial Office, called ‘ the collect,’ points to a mortuary celebration, at which it would naturally be used.

11. Everything connected with the subse quent state of the grave, such as the design of

the headstone, etc., ought to be Christian in idea. Care should be taken to remove flowers when withered; for they are then as unsightly and disorderly, as they were before beautiful.

12. If a memorial card be printed, it should be correct and good. A simple card is best; and for the words to be put upon it, it is generally best to ask advice. The clergy, for instance, would at any time willingly give it. The rhyming verses often used are mostly doggerel, and should be avoided. On the other hand, for those who like some text or verse, there are many which are touching and very edifying: but make sure that they are ap propriate.

” Them which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.”

v. THE HOLY COMMUNION.

SUGGESTIONS FOR A DEVOUT RECEPTION OP

THE HOLY COMMUNION.

%

1. Never receive the Holy Communion with out careful preparation. A list of books con taining suitable devotions before Communion is given on page 392.

2. If it be possible, always communicate early, that you may the more easily receive fasting, according to the universal custom of the Church; and also that you may “attend upon the Lord without distraction.”

3. Try to be in church at least five minutes before the service at the altar begins, and if possible, earlier still, for private devotion. If unavoidably late, it is well, as a general rule, not to communicate if you arrive after the Confession.

4. When in church, remember that you are engaged in a great act of congregational worship and intercession, in which each member of the * royal priesthood’ should exercise his office intelligently and heartily.

5. Fill up all intervals in the public Liturgy with prayers and intercessions. Have suitable books of devotion for this purpose, but learn not to be tied down to them.

6. When the time comes for communicating, hold yourself in readiness to go up to the altar. Take off both your gloves, put aside your veil, or anything else that is likely to embarrass yourself or the priests.

7. Kneel down very reverently at the altarstep. Say secretly again and again such words as these, — ” Lord, it is good for me to be here; ” or, ” Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof.”

8. When your own turn comes, kneel quite upright, and prepare to receive the sacrament of the Lord’s body into the palm of your right hand, steadied by the left, holding your hands well up, with the fingers straight out. Keep the hands quite still. Then receive It from your palm with your mouth, taking care not to leave a particle on your hand, or to let one crumb fall to the ground.

g. On receiving the chalice, take hold of it firmly, by graspimg its stem, in order to guide it to your lips, and to prevent accidents. On no account receive it with a jerk, or let go of it suddenly.

10. When waiting in the chancel for room at the altar, kneel rather than stand.

11. After returning to your place, kneel and engage in private thanksgiving and prayer. If kneeling becomes irksome, stand a while. But never sit after the consecration of the Blessed Sacrament.

12. Do not leave the church until the clergy, have left the altar. It is best to make your thanksgiving before you depart.

part jfourtb.

Hppenbfy.

Chapter XXII. The XXXIX. Articles

^TT*HE Thirty-nine Articles are not Articles of Faith like the Creeds, and they are not imposed on members of the Anglican Church as necessary terms of communion. The clergy only subscribe them, and the sense in which the subscription is understood, has been stated by Archbishop Bramhall as follows; — ” We do not hold our Thirty-nine Articles to be such necessary truths, ‘ without which there is no salvation; ‘ nor enjoin ecclesiastical persons to swear unto them, but only to subscribe them, as theological truths, for the preservation of unity among us. Some of them are the very same that are contained.in the Creed; some others of them are practical truths, which come not within the proper list of points or articles to be believed; lastly, some of them are pious opinions or inferior truths which are proposed by the Church of England as not to be opposed; not as essentials of Faith necessary to be be lieved.” z Bishop Bull wrote similarly, — ” The Church of England professeth not to deliver all her Articles as essentials of faith, without the belief whereof no man can be saved; but only propounds them as a body of safe and pious 1 Works, vol. ii., pp. 201, 476.

principles, for the preservation of peace to be subscribed, and not openly contradicted by her sons. And, therefore, she requires subscription to them only from the clergy, and not from the laity.” ‘

” The Articles are to be subscribed to in the sense intended by those whose authority makes the subscription requisite.”2 It must always be remembered that the same Convocation, in the same set of Canons which first required subscription to the Articles, in 1571, enjoined that preachers should only teach “that which is agreeable to the dpctrine of the Old and New Testaments, and that which the Catholic fathers and ancient bishops have collected out of the same doctrine.” ” It seems ” says Mr. Keble, “no violent inference, that the appointed measure of doctrine preached, was also intended to be the measure of doctrine delivered in the way of explanation of doubtful passages in formu laries.’^

It is quite evident, therefore that the Articles would be understood by the clergy who first subscribed them as. Articles of Peace for the preservation of unity.- They were not religious tests, or Articles of Faith; they were made as comprehensive as possible, and they were to be interpreted and understood in accordance with the general rule of Catholic tradition, i.e., in the Catholic sense.4

4 ” I understand by the Catholic sense, that sense which is most conformable to the ancient rule, ‘ Quod semper t quod

, quodab omnibus.’” Ibid., p. 14.

Chapter XXIII. Sacramental Confession

DECLARATION OF DR. PusEY.1 T

0 sum up what I believe and have taught on this head: —

(i.) “I fully believe that any sin will be forgiven by God upon a deep and entire repent ance, for the merits of our Lord and S.aviour Jesus Christ alone, and that those merits are the only source of all forgiveness. Surely, one cannot see the blessed lives and death-beds of persons, who, without confession to man, live in the true faith and fear and love of God, and of our Lord Jesus Christ, without believing that they are in the full grace and favor of God. I have never taught that confession to man was necessary to forgiveness, and have said that in 1548 the Church of England had gone back to her earlier condition, as expressed in the ‘ Pcenitentiak of Theodore, when some confessed their sins to God alone, some to the priests; and both with great fruit within the Holy Church.’

(2.) ” I also believe that ‘ Our Lord Jesus Christ hath left power to his Church to absolve

The Good Shepherd.

“The Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.” — St. Luke xix. 10.

all sinners who truly repent and believe in him/ This power I believe to be ministerial, as in Baptism, since it pleases God to employ visible instruments in conveying his mercies to the soul.

(3.) “This power, I believe to be conferred on priests in their ordination, in the solemn words, ‘ Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a priest in the Church of God, now committed unto these by the imposition of our hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive, ‘they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained,’ and that which is done in his name, and according to his will, He confirms in heaven, as He says: ‘ Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ (St. Matt, xviii. 18.)

(4.) ” I believe that Absolution is not only a comfort, but is a means of grace to the soul; or rather is a comfort, because it is a means of grace to the soul; and that God, through man, pronounces forgiveness of sins upon all who truly repent and turn to him.

(5.) ” I believe that, being a means of grace with an outward visible sign, it does, according to the teaching of our Church, in a secondary sense, come under the title of ‘ sacrament,’ and that our Homilies in that secondary sense do so call it, as having ‘ the promise of forgiveness of sins ‘ (although not exclusively), and an outward sign, imposition of hands, although the grace of forgiveness is not tied or restricted to that act.

” It is an entire perversion of the whole ques tion that some have ventured to speak of ‘ priestly power,’ ‘ spiritual independence,’ ‘ sacerdotal rights,’ &c. If a physician goes about to minister to the sick, bind up the broken, apply to the cure ol diseases the medicines which God has given him the knowledge and the skill to use, no one speaks of * assumption of power; ‘ no one thinks it a part of ‘ independence ‘ to die neglected. Why then speak of ‘ priestly power,’ when people ask the ministers of God to impart that with which God has entrusted them? Why is it undue * power* to bind up the broken hearted, to pour into their wounds the wine and oil of penitence, to lift them up when despond ing, to loose them, in Christ’s name, from the chains of their sins, and encourage them anew to the conflict? Why, but that to those who know not what the conflict is, what sin is, who have no idea of mental sickness, or anxiety, or distress, all, both sickness and remedy, must seem a dream? To minister to bodily wants is accounted a benefit; to minister to spiritual, which men know not of, is a reproach! In the world, ‘they that exercise lordship over them are called benefactors: ‘ but even an apostle had occasion to say, ‘ Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? ‘ “

” Such as shall be satisfied with a general confession (are) not to be offended with them that do use to their further satisfying the auricular and secret confession to the priest; nor those also which think needful or convenient, for the suietness of their own consciences, particularly to open their

sins to the priest, to be offended with them that are satisfied with their humble confession to God, and the general con fession to the Church. But in all things to follow and keep the rule of charity, and every man to be satisfied with his own conscience, not judging other men’s minds or con sciences, whereas he hath no warrant of God’s word to the same.” — First Prc vet Book of Edward VI.

Chapter XXIV. Books Recommended

THE HOLY BIBLE.

‘ The S.P.C.K. Commentary on the Bible,’ including the Apocrypha, 7 volumes. The Commentary on the New Testament, in 2 volumes, may be had separately.

‘ The Church Commentary on the New Testament,’ by Prebendary Sadler, 12 volumes, to be had separately.

‘ A Plain Commentary on the Gospels,’ by Dean Burgon, in 5 volumes, to be had Second-hand only.

THE PRAYER BOOK.

‘The Book of Common Prayer, with Commentary.’ (S.P.C.K.) The Commentary may be had separately.

»

FOR HOLY COMMUNION.

‘ Addresses and Instructions on Holy Communion ‘ (Mowbrays).

‘ The Christian Way ‘ (Mowbrays).

‘ Christian Duty ‘ (Mowbrays).

‘ The Treasury of Devotion ‘ (Longmans).

THE CHURCH’S SEASONS, FESTIVALS, ETC.

‘ The Seasons, Fasts, and Festivals of the Christian Year ‘ (Mowbrays).

FOR DEVOTIONAL READING.

‘ The Imitation of Christ.’

‘The Confessions of St. Augustine.’

‘ The Christian Character ‘ (Mowbrays).

Chapter XXV. The Kalendar

I. THE KALENDAR OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH.

IN the compilation of the Kalendar of the English Church, the same course was adopted as had been taken in respect to the Prayer Book itself, the compilers consulting the Sarum Breviary and Missal, and selecting from the Kalendars of these books such com memorations as they thought fit. The Anglican Kalendar is marked —

1. By the absence of all Old Testament saints who were commemorated so numerously in the older Western Kalendars, as they are still in the Kalendar of the Eastern Church. The present Roman Kalendar contains only one such commemoration, viz.: the Maccabean Martyrs on August i.

2. By the absence of several New Testament saints, including St. Joseph of Nazareth and St. Joseph of Arimathaea. But both of these names were absent from the majority of the older English Church Kalendars, including the Sarum Kalendar, and the latter may perhaps be considered to be sufficiently commemorated in the services of Easter Eve.

3. By the absence of the names of Irish and Scottish saints. This is a defect which we inherit, except as regards St. Bridget, from the Sarum Kalendar. It is a defect which we may hope some day to see supplied, at least as far as regards the more famous saints of the two sister countries and Churches of Scotland and Ireland.

4. By the absence of the names of Eastern saints such as the following, all of whom are commemorated in the present Roman Kalendar, viz., Saints Athanasius, Basil the Great, Chrysostom, Gregory Nazianzen, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp. Many more great names might be added from Eastern sources. All except St. Basil were absent from the Sarum Kalendar; hence our loss. The two Greek fathers, St. Athanasius and St. Chrysostom, are recognized in the Prayer Book, though not in the Kalendar.

JANUARY.

i. THE CIRCUMCISION of our Lord.

6. THE EPIPHANY, or Manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles.

8. St. Lucian. Priest and Martyr at Beauvais, A.D. 290. 13. St. Hilary, Bishop of Poictiers, A.D. 368. 1 8. St. Prisca, Virgin and Martyr at Rome, A.D. 270.

20. St. Fabian, Bishop of Rome, and Martyr, A. D. 250.

21. St. Agnes, Virgin and Martyr at Rome, A.D. 304.

22. St. Vincent, Deacon and Martyr at Valencia, A. D. 304. 25. CONVERSION of ST. PAUL, A.D. 34.

30. King Charles, Martyr, A.D. 1649.

FEBRUARY.

2. PURIFICATION of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

3. St. Blasius, Bishop of Sebaste, A.D. 316.

5. St. Agatha, Virgin and Martyr in Sicily, A.D. 251.

14. St. Valentine, Bishop and Martyr at Rome, A.D. 270.

24. ST. MATTHIAS, Apostle and Martyr.

MARCH.

1. St. David, Patron Saint of Wales, A.D. 544.

2. St. Chad, Bishop of Lichfield, A.D. 673.

7. St. Perpetua, Martyr at Carthage, A.D. 203.

12. St. Gregory, Bishop of Rome, A.D. 604.

1 8. St. Edward the Martyr, A.D. 978. 21. St. Benedict, Abbot, A.D. 543.

25. ANNUNCIATION of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

APRIL.

3. St. Richard, Bishop of Chichester, A.D. 1253.

4. St. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, A.D. 397.

19. St. Alphege, Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 1012. 23. St. George, Patron Saint of England, A. D. 303. 25. ST. MARK, Evangelist and Martyr.

MAY.

i. ST. PHILIP and ST. JAMES, Apostles and Martyrs.

3. The Finding of the Holy Cross, A.D. 326.

6. St. John, before the Latin Gate of Rome, A.D. 95.

19. St. Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 988.

26. St. Augustine, Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 604.

27. The Venerable Bede, Priest, A.D. 735.

JUNE.

I. St. Nicomede, Priest and Martyr at Rome, A.D. 90.

5. St. Boniface, Bishop of Mayence, and Martyr, A.D. 775. ii. ST. BARNABAS, Apostle and Martyr at Cyprus. 17. St. Alban, First Martyr of Britain, A.D. 303. 20. Translation of St. Edward the Martyr, A.D. 982. 23- Vigil. 24. NATIVITY of ST. JOHN BAPTIST.

29. ST. PETER, Apostle and Martyr.

JULY.

2. Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

4. Translation of St. Martin, A.D. 473.

15. Translation of St. Swithun, A.D. 971.

20. St. Margaret, Virgin and Martyr at Antioch, A.D. 278.

22. St. Mary Magdalene.

25. ST. JAMES, Apostle and Martyr.

26. St. Anne, Mother of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

AUGUST.

I. Lammas Day.

6. Transfiguration of our Blessed LORD.

7. Holy Name of JESUS.

10. St. Laurence, Deacon and Martyr, A.D. 258.

24. ST. BARTHOLOMEW, Apostle and Martyr.

28. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, A.D. 430.

29. Beheading of St. John Baptist, A.D. 32.

SEPTEMBER.

i. St. Giles, Abbot in France, A.D. 725.

7. St. Enurchus, Bishop of Orleans, A.D. 340.

8. Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. 14. Exaltation of the Holy Cross, A.D. 335.

17. St. Lambert, Bishop of Msestricht, A.D. 709.

21. ST. MATTHEW, Apostle, Evangelist and Martyr.

26. St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, and Martyr, A. D. 258.

29. ST. MICHAEL and ALL ANGELS.

30. St. Jerome, Priest and Doctor of the Church, A. D. 420.

OCTOBER.

I. St. Remigius, Bishop of Rheims, A.D. 530.

6. St. Faith, Virgin and Martyr at Agen, A.D. 290.

9. St. Denys, Bishop and Martyr at Paris, A.D. 250. 13. Translation of St. Edward the Confessor, A.D. 1163.

17. St. Etheldreda, Virgin, Abbess of Ely, A.D. 679.

1 8. ST. LUKE, Evangelist and Martyr.

25. St. Crispin, Martyr at Soissons, A.D. 285.

28. ST. SIMON and ST. JUDE, Apostles and Martyrs^

NOVEMBER.

i. ALL SAINTS’ DAY.

6. St. Leonard, Abbot of Limoges, A.D. 559.

II. St. Martin, Bishop of Tours, A.D. 397.

13. St. Britius, Bishop of Tours, A.D. 444.

15. St. Machutus, Bishop of Aleth, A.D. 564.

17. St. Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln, A.D. 1200.

20. St. Edmund, King of East Anglia, and Martyr, A. D. 870.

22. St. Cecilia, Virgin and Martyr at Rome, A.D. 230.

23. St. Clement, Bishop of Rome, and Martyr, A.D. 100. 25. St. Catherine, Virgin and Martyr at Alexandria, A. D. 307.

30. ST. ANDREW, Apostle and Martyr.

DECEMBER.

6. St. Nicolas, Bishop of Myra, A.D. 342.

8. Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

13. St. Lucy, Virgin and Martyr in Sicily, A.D. 303.

1 6. O Sapientia.

21. ST. THOMAS, Apostle and Martyr.

25. CHRISTMAS-DAY, the Birth-Day of Christ.

26. ST. STEPHEN, Deacon and Martyr.

27. ST. JOHN, Apostle, Evangelist and Martyr

28. THE HOLY INNOCENTS.

31. St. Silvester, Bishop of Rome, A. r>. 335.

SAINTS COMMEMORATED IN THE

THE HOLY APOSTLES, AND OTHERS.

MARTYRS IN THE AGE OF PERSECUTIONS.

The Blessed Virgin Mary.

St. Nicomede.

St. Michael and All Angels.

St. Clement.

All Saints.

St. Perpetua.

St. John the Baptist.

St. Cecilia.

St. Peter.

St. Denys.*

St. James the Greater. St. John the Evangelist.

St. Fabian.

St. Andrew.

St. Agatha.

St. Philip.

St. Laurence.

St. Thomas.

St. Cyprian.

St. Bartholomew.

St. Valentine.

St. Matthew.

St. Prisca.

St. James the Less.

St. Margaret.

St. Simon Zelotes.

St. Crispin.

St. Jude.

St. Lucian.

St. Matthias.

St. Faith.

St. Paul.

St. Barnabas.

St. Lucy.

St. Mark.

St. Agnes.

St. Luke.

St. Vincent.

St. Stephen.

St. Catherine.

The Holy Innocents.

St. Blasius.

St. Mary Magdalene.

St. Anne.

Kalendar of the English Church. 399 KALENDAR OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH.

MARTYRS & OTHER SAINTS SPECIALLY CONNECTED WITH ENGLAND.

FRENCH & OTHER SAINTS NOT INCLUDED AMONG THE PRECEDING.

St. George.

A.D.

St. Silvester.

A.D.

St. Alban.

St. Enurchus.

St. David.

St. Nicolas.

St. Machutus.

St. Hilary of St. Gregory.

Poictiers.

St. Augustine of St. Ambrose.

Canterbury.

St. Martin.

St. Chad.

St. Jerome.

St. Etheldreda.

St. Augustine of

Venerable Bede.

Hippo.

St. Boniface.

St. Britius.

St. Swithun.

St. Remigius.

St. Edmund.

St. Benedict.

St. Edward.

St. Leonard.

St. Dunstan.

St. Lambert.

St. Alphege.

St. Giles.

St. Edward the

Confessor.

St. Hugh.

St. Richard.

King Charles I.

See Blum’s Annotated Booh of Common Praytt. 188.”,. p. 128.

ADDENDA TO THE KALENDAR.

The following Commemorations are taken from various sources, Eastern and Western: —

Jan. 4. St. Titus, Bp., Disciple of St. Paul, 105.

,, 7. St. Cedde, Bp. of London, 664.

,, 10. William Laud, Archbp. of Canterbury, Martyr, 1645.

,, 12. St. Benedict Biscop, Founder of Wearmouth & Jarrow monasteries, 703.

,, 13. St. Kentigern(St. Mungo), Bp. of Glasgow, 601.

,, 17. St. Anthony, Hermit in Egypt, 356.

,, 20. St. Sebastian, Soldier & Martyr, 303.

,, 24. St. Timothy, Bp., Disciple of St. Paul, 97.

,, 26. St. Polycarp, Bp. of Smyrna, Martyr, 167.

,, 27. St. Chrysostom, Bp. of Constantinople, 407.

,, 28. St. Cyril, Bp. of Alexandria, 444.

Feb. i. St. Ignatius, Bp. of Syria, Martyr, 107.

,,,, St. Bridget, Abbess of Kildare, 523.

,, 10. St. Scholastica, Virgin, Sister of St. Benedict, c. 540.

,, II. St. Csedmon, Monk of Whitby, & Poet, c. 680.

,, 17. St. Finan, Bp. of Lindisfarne, 681.

,, 18. St. Colman, Bp. in Scotland, 676.

March 7. St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor, 1274.

8. St. Felix, Bp. of Dunwich, 647.

,, 9. St. Gregory, Bp. of Nyssa in Cappadocia, 395.

,, 17. St. Patrick, Apost. of Ireland, 463.

,, 1 8. St. Cyril, Bp. of Jerusalem, 389.

,, 19. St. Joseph of Bethlehem, 1st cent.

,, 20. St. Cuthbert, Bp., “Patron-saint of Lindisfarne,

April ii. St. Leo the Great, Bp. of Rome, 461.

,, 21. St. Anselm, Archbp. of Canterbury, 1109.

,, 28. St. Vitalis, Mart, at Ravenna, Patron-saint of its famous church, c. 171.

,, 30. St. Catherine of Sienna, 1380.

May 2. St. Athanasius, Bp. of Alexandria, 373.

,, 4. St. Monica, Mother of St. Augustine, 388.

,, 7. St. John of Beverley, Bp., 721..

,, 9. St. Gregory Nazianzen, Bp. of Constantinople,

391.,, 19. St. Alcuin of York, Priest, 804.

May 24. St. Vincent of Lerins, Priest, 445.

,, 25. St. Aldhelm, 1st Bp. of Sherborne, 709.

June i. St. Justin Mart., Apologist, c. 165.

,, 9. St. Columba, Abbot of lona, Apostle of the Highlands of Scotland, 597.

,, 14. St. Basil the Great, Bp. of Csesarea in Cappadocia, 379.

,, 17. St. Botulph, Abbot of Ikanho, 655.

,, 28. St. Irenseus, Bp. of Lyons, c. 202.

July 19. St. Vincent of Paul, Confessor at Paris, 1660.

,, 20. St. Joseph of Arimathea, ist cent.

,, 31. St. Germanus, Bp. of Auxerre, 448.

Aug. i. The Maccabean Martyrs, 2nd cent. B.C.

,, 4. St. Dominic, Founder of the Order of Preachers,

,, 5. St. Oswald, King of Northumbria, Martyr, 642.

,, 15. Falling asleep of the B.V. Mary, ist cent.

,, 20. St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Abbot, 1153.

,, 31. St. Aidan, ist Bishop of Lindisfarne, 651. Sept. 1 6. St. Ninian, Bp., Apostle of S. of Scotland, 432.

,, 23. St. Adamnan, Abbot of lona, 704.

,, 27. SS. Cosmas and Damian, Physicians, 297. Oct. 4. St. Francis of Assisi, Founder of Friars Minors, 1226.

,, 10. St. Paulinus of York, Bp. 644.

,, 12. St. Edwin, King, Martyr, 633.

„ 19. St. Wilfrid of York, Bp., 709.

,,,, St. Frideswide of Oxford, Abbess, 750. Nov. 2. All Souls’ Day.

,, 7. St. Willibrord, Missionary to Frisia, 739.

,, 16. St. Margaret, Queen of Scotland, 1093.

,, 17. St. Hilda, Abbess of Whitby, 680.

,,,, St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, Bp. of Neocaesarea, 270.

,, 19. St. Elizabeth of Hungary, 1231.

,, 21. St. Columban of Leinster, Abbot, 615. Dec. 3. St. Birinus, Bp. of Dorchester, 650″.

,,,, St. Francis Xavier, Missionary, 1552.

,,,, St. Osmund, Bp. of Salisbury, 1099.

,, 4. St. Clement of Alexandria, Head of its famous Catechetical School, 217.

„ 29. St. Thomas a Becket, Archbp. of Canterbury, Martyr, 1170.

For the Moveable and Immoveable Feasts t through the whole Year.

RULES to know when the Moveable Feasts and Holy Days begin.

TOASTER-DA Y (on which the rest depend) is always the first Sunday after the Full Moon which happens upon,

or next after the Twenty-first Day of March; and if the Full

Moon happens upon a Sunday ‘, Easter-Day is the Sunday after.

Advent-Sunday is always the nearest Sunday to the Feast

of St. Andrew, whether before or after. Septuagesima \ (Nine ^

Sexagesima I Sunday I Eight I Weeks before Quinquagesima j is j Seven f Easter. Quadragesima } \. Six }

Rogation- Sunday\ C Five Weeks ^ Ascension-day I. I Forty Days I, p Whitsunday [1S 1 Seven Weeks f a er £>aster’ Trinity-Sunday) [Eight Weeks J

A TABLE of all the Feasts that are to be observed in the

Church of England throughout the Year. All Sundays in the Year.

/-The Circumcision of our LORD JESUS CHRIST. The Epiphany.— The Conversion of St. Paul. The Purification of the Blessed Virgin. St. Matthias the Apostle. The Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin. St. Mark the Evangelist.

St. Philip and St. James the Apostles.

The Ascension of our LORD JESUS CHRIST.

St. Barnabas. — The Nativity of St. John Baptist.

St. Peter the Apostle. — St. James the Apostle.

St. Bartholomew the Apostle.

St. Matthew the Apostle.

St. Michael and All Angels.

St. Luke the Evangelist.

St. Simon and St. Jude, the Apostles.

All Saints. — St. Andrew the Apostle.

St. Thomas the Apostle.— The Nativity of our LORD.

St. Stephen the Martyr. — St. John the Evangelist..The Holy Innocents. Monday and Tuesday in Easter- Week. Monday and Tuesday in Whitsun- Week.

OF THE

VIGILS, FASTS, AND DAYS OF ABSTINENCE

TO BE OBSERVED IN THE YEAR.

The Evens or Vigils before

The Nativity of our LORD. The Purification of the

Blessed Virgin Mary. The Annunciation of the

Blessed Virgin. Easter-Day. Ascension-Day. Pentecost. St. Matthias.

St. John Baptist.

St. Peter.

St. James.

St. Bartholomew.

St. Matthew.

St. Simon and St. Jude.

St. Andrew.

St. Thomas.

All Saints.

Note, that if any of these Feast-Days fall upon a Monday, then the Vigil or Fast-Day shall be kept upon the Saturday, and not upon the Sunday next before it.

Days of Fasting, or Abstinence. I. The Forty Days of Lent.

II. The Ember-Days at the fThe First Sunday in Lent Four Seasons being the I The Feast of Pentecost. Wednesday, Friday, and 1 September 14. Saturday after \December 1 3.

III. The Three Rogation- Days, being the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday before Holy Thursday, or the Ascension of our LORD.

IV. All the Fridays in the Year, except CHRISTMASDAY.

OF

KINDRED AND AFFINITY,

WHEREIN

WHOSOEVER ARE RELATED ARE FORBIDDEN IN SCRIPTURE AND OUR LAWS TO MARRY TOGETHER.

The following Table contains in an abbreviated form all the relationships forbidden in the Book of Common Prayer. The relations of the man only are named below, but the same rules apply to those of the woman also. The pro hibition extends to three classes of possible relationship: one by birth, and two by marriage or affinity.

his mother – – – – V t, A man may not ins aaugnier marry his own

his sister or half-sister – -} relative by blood – his grandmother – -)-2nd degree.

within the third his granddaughter -J degree his aunt Miis niece ]J3rd degree.

A man may not marry any of his fher mother her daughter [list degree.

wife’s relatives ” 1_1 J her sister or half-sister -|

nearer in blood than he can of his own, i.e.

her grandmother her granddaughter – |-2nd degree.

within the third degree

her aunt ^>her niece. – “1 3rd degree.

A man may not his father’s his son’s ” V 1st degree.

marry the widow

his brother’s or half-br other’ s^l

of his own rela tive by blood within the third

his grandfather’s his grandson’s – – r 2nd degree.

degree his uncle’s his nephew’s ” V 3rd degree.

Reprinted from Marriage with a Deceased Wiffs Sister^ by Philadelphus, 1885. p.

INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS.

PACK

The Incarnation » ‘ – • – 166

The Annunciation – -.. -171

The Man of Sorrows – -. -184

The Crucifixion – – *. 186

The Ascension – – • 203

The Descent of THE HOLY GHOST – • 214

The Communion of Saints – • • -221 The Ten Commandments…. 232

INDEX TO AUTHORS.

ANCIENT AUTHORS QUOTED.

Ambrose, 211, 273, 292.

Athanasius, 175.

Augustine, 13, 147, 148, 158, 163, 175, 224, 225, 237, 244, 257, 272, 274, 275, 282, 303, 310, 314,

321, 335, 347, 364Basil, 209, 246. Bede, 76, 80, 262. Bernard, 188, 229. Chrysostom, 205, 224. Cyprian, 48, 57, 281.

Cyril of Jerusalem, 127, 132,

Gregory Nyssen, 163, 256. Hippolytus, 167. Ignatius, 29, 36, 42, 278. Irenaeus, 37, 46, 279, 365. Jerome, 48, 342. John Damascene, 304. Justin Martyr, 279, 365. Leo, 246.

Tertullian, 36, 224, 299, 364. Vincent of Lerins, xvi, 126.

MODERN AUTHORS QUOTED.

Addis and Arnold, 259. Arnold, 199. Andrewes, 244, 292. Bingham, 282. Bossuet, 114, 228, 318. Bramhall, 101, 260, 385. Bright, 69, 71, 74, 99, 175,

Bull, 101, 247, 385. Carter, 60, 113, 326. Chocarne, 326. Church, 173. Comber, 295. Cosin, 251, 272, 276, 296. Courayer, 106. Dollinger, 64, 114. Edersheim, 280. Faber, 189, 229. Forbes, 138, 157, 164, 301. Gore, 24, 52, 103, 218, 366. Haddan, 105. Hail, 174. Hooker, 35, 116, 159, 254,

Hutchings, 9, 212. Johnson, 285. Keble, 132, 141, 182, 386. JUud, 130, 349.

Liddon, 30, 147, 305, 320, 321, 338, 341, 345, 348, 354, 367-

Lightfoot, 19, 75, 76, 80, 175.

Lingard, 106, 107.

Manning, 322.

Martene, 106.

Mason, 267.

Montalembert, 77.

Moore, 86, 93, 100.

Mozley, 320.

Neale, 26, 119, 245.

Newman, 55, 59, 62, 254,

271, 337Overall, 276. Plumptre, 225. Puller, 44, 47, 282. Pusey, 23, 54, 63, 65, 90,

112, 126, 128, 192, 193,

223, 226, 244, 271, 289,

301, 387. Sanderson, 33. Sparrow, 285, 290, 364. Stanley, 117.

Taylor, 41, 260, 273, 284. Trench, 87, 90, 92. Warren, 77. Wordsworth, 269.

GENERAL INDEX.

Aaronic priesthood, 8, 15, 25, 365.

Abraham, 4.

Absolution, 41, 252, 289 etc., 389.

Agape, 281.

Aidan, St., iii, 75 etc.

Alban, St., 70.

Alfred the Great, iii.

Almsgiving, 247.

Amendment, 297.

Angels of the Churches, 10, 32.

Angels, the, Creation of, 158.

Fall of, 159.

„ Ranks of, 158, 159. Anglican Church, Bishops of the, 119 etc. „ Orders, 103 etc. „ Principle as to the Truth, 124 etc. Anglo-Saxon Church, the, 79 etc. Annates, 85.

Anointing the Sick, 300 etc. Apocrypha, the, 338, 341. Apostles, the, 13, 14, 17, 27 etc., 38, 48, z8i. Apostolic, the Church, 220.

,, Succession, the, 17, 20 etc., 36, 64, 100, 103.

„,, in See of Canterbury, 115.

Appeals to Rome, 87, 98. Arian Heresy, the, 39, 139. Articles, the XXXIX., 385.

„ „ quoted, vi. 342, viii. 128, xi. 328,

xiii. 328, xx. 347, xxii. 194, 223, xxv. 256, 301, 328, xxxi. 269.

Articles of the Faith, the, 146 etc. Ascension, the, 202 etc.

Assurance, 331. Athanasius, St., 139, 394. Atonement, the, 187, 253. Angustine, St., of Canterbury, iii, 73, 115. Bangor, Conference at, 73. Baptism of CHRIST, the, 181. Baptism, Holy, 41, 138, 260 etc., 322 etc., 365. „ Effects of, 262, 322 etc. „ Infant, 262, 369. „ Lay, 41.,, Notes on, 369 etc. Baptismal Vows, 133, 134, 263, 288. Barlow, Bishop, 106 etc. Bible, the Holy, 124 etc., 335 etc.

„ „ Contents of, 338 etc.

»,, Inspiration of, 212, 335 etc.

,,,, Interpretation of, 124 etc., 347 et,x

,, and the Church, the, 345 etc. Birinus, 78. Birth of CHRIST, the, 167 168.

„ the New, 258, 260, 322 etc. Birth-sin, 162, 168. Bishops, 27 etc.

,, Grades among, 43 etc.

,, of the Anglican Church, 119 etc. Body of CHRIST, the Church the, 56, 216, 220, 275. Body, the Resurrection of the, 227, 228. Books recommended, 392. Bowing, 362 etc. Brethren of the LORD, the, 175. British Church, the, iii, 46, 69 etc. Burial of CHRIST, the, 195.

‘,, „ the Dead, Notes on the, 378 etc. Canon of Scripture, 126, 339 etc., 346, 347. Canons quoted, 128, 285, 296, 299, 363, 371, 386, Canterbury, 73.

,, Succession in the See of, 115.

Cardinal Virtues, the, 250. Catholic, the Church, 219. Celtic Mission, the, 75 etc. Census, Tax of the, 84. Ceremonial, 353 etc. Chalice, the Mixed, 265, 358. Charity, 250. Chastity, 249.

General Index.

CHRIST, Ascension of, 202 etc. Baptism of, 181. Birth of, 167, i63. Burial of, 195. Circumcision of, 178. Conception of, 167, 170 etc. Crucifixion of, 185 etc. Descent into Hell, 189 etc. the Head of the Church, 56, 206, 216, 218, Intercession of, 205 etc. Ministry of, 181. Name of, 181. two Natures of, 168. Obedience of, 188. Person of, 168, 175. Prophet, Priest, and King, 16, 181. our Representative, 188. Resurrection of, 195 etc., 200 etc., 367. Sacrifice of, 183 etc. the Second Adam, 188, 255, 256. Second Coming of, 207 etc, 311. the Sin- Bearer, 185. Sinlessness of, 168. Sufferings of, 169, 183 etc. Temptation of, 181. Transfiguration of, 182. Church, the, the Ark of Safety, 53 etc.

the Body of CHRIST, 56, 216, 219, 220, 275.

the Bride of CHRIST, 49, 56, 220, 330.

a covenanted sphere, 55, 133, 218.

Divisions in, 56 etc.

Foundation of, u etc.

the Home of the Truth, 51 etc.

the Kingdom of GOD, 56, 201, 262.

the Ministry of, 15 etc.

Notes of, 218 etc.

Office of, 51, 216 etc.

Precepts of, 251.

the Soul of, 53, 54.

the Sphere of Grace, 50.

Unity of, 57, 58, 63 etc. Church and the Bible, the, 345 etc. Church and State, v.

Churching of Women, Notes on the, 371 etc. Clergy, 18.

Colours, the Liturgical, 359 etc. Commandments, the, 232 etc.

„ „ Sins against, 238 etc.

Communion, the Holy, 41, 275 etc., 313.,,,, Notes on, 380 etc.

Communion of Saints, the, 220 etc. Confession, 294 etc., 387 etc. „ Form of, 295.

„ Seal of, 296.

Confirmation, 286 etc., 365. Conscience, 233. Contrition, 293. Conversion, 263, 322, 325 etc. Councils, General, 39, 95, 128 etc.

,,,, acknowledged by English Church,

100, 128. Council of Ariminum, 70.

„ Aries, 70.

„ Chalcedon, 47.

„ Constantinople, 60, 139.

„ Ephesus, 175.

„ Nicsea, 39, 60, 139.

„ Trent, 95, 124.

Counsels of Perfection, the, 248. Course, the Christian, 317 etc. Covenant, the Baptismal, 133, 134. Covenanted Grace, 25, 40. Creation, the, 155 etc.

,, of Angels, 158.

,, of Man, 1 60, 254. Creed, the Apostles’, 137.

,, the Athanasian, 139.

,, the Nicene, 59, 60, 139, 165. Creeds, the, 128, 136 etc.

,, Comparison of the, 140 etc. Cross, Altar, 358.

„ Sign of the, 364, 371. „ Words from the, 187. Deacons, 27. Death, 58, 227. Death of CHRIST, the, 185 etc. Departed, the, 190 etc., 220 etc.

„ Prayer for, 98, 224 etc., 272, 378, 379, 401. Development, 52, 125.

Devil, the, 159, 164, 181, 183, 189, 315. Diversity of teaching, 129, 349.

„ ceremonial, 35^. Divisions in the Church, 56 etc. Divorce, 299.

Duties, the Notable, 243 etc Duty to GOD, 236.

„ neighbor, 236. Eastward -position, the, 357. Ecclesiastical Books, the, 341. Edwin, King, 74. Edward III., 84, 85.

„ VI., First Prayer Book of, 108, 273, 302, 358,

„ „ Ordinal of, 108 etc. Elders, 28. Election, 317 etc.

Elizabeth, Queen, 95, 99, 104, 128. Ember Seasons, the, 297, 298. England, Conversion of, 69 etc. Episcopate, the, 30 etc., 33 etc., 57.

of Divine institution, 33. the Bond of Unity, 35. the Fount of the Ministry, 34. the Guardian of the Truth, 36. the Instrument of Grace, 40. St. Cyprian on, 57. Ethelbert, King, 73, 74. Eucharist, the Holy, 206, 207, 263 etc.

,,,, Institution of, 263 etc.

Eucharistic Feast, the, 275 etc.

„ Sacrifice, the, 98, no etc., 206, 207,

266 etc., 359.,, Vestments, 356 etc.

„ Worship, 352, 364, 366.

Evangelical Revival, the, iii, iv. Ever- Virgin, the, 167, 175. Evil, the Origin of, 163. Evolution, 156. Faith, 146, 147, 250. Faith and Practice, vi, 132 etc Faith, the, 36 etc., 135 etc.

,, of the Church, 135 etc Faith, the Rule of, 124 etc., 136. Fall of the Angels, the, 159.

Fall of Man, the, 161. Fasting, 245.

„ before Communion, 280 etc., 368, 380.

Days of, 246, 403. Felix, the Burgundian, 78. Festivals, List of, 402. Filioque Clause, the, 59. Final Perseverance, 331 etc. Forbidden Degrees, Table of, 404. Forgiveness of Sins, 226, 313, 387 etc.

of others, 314. Fortitude, 251.

Forty Days, the Great, 200 etc. Freewill, 3, 161, 163, 164, 233, 319 etc, Friars, the, 91 etc. Gentiles, the, 6. Gethsemane, 185, 312. GOD, Eternity of, 150.

Existence of, 146, 149. Fatherhood of, 154. First Cause; the, 147. Holiness of, 150. Love of, 151, 189. Nature of, 149. Omnipotence of, 150. Omnipresence of, 151. Omniscience of, 151. Perfections of, 149 etc. Revelation of, 149. G ace, 40, 50, 161, 256, 319 etc. covenanted, 25, 40, 218. uncovenanted, 42, 218. Grades among the Bishops, 43 etc. Gregory, Pope, 71 etc. Hades, 191. Heaven, 230. Hell, 189, 229.

,, the Descent into, 189 etc. Henry VIII., 94, 95, 98. Heresy, 36, 194. Herod, King, 179. Holy, the Church, 219. HOLY SPIRIT, THE, the Agent in the Incarnation, 167,

170, 172. „ in the Church, 38, 51, 55, 213 etc*

HOLY SPIRIT, THE, Descent of, 181, 211, 213, 215.

a Divine Person, 60, 210, 21 1.

Inspiration of, 212, 335 etc.

the Life- Giver, 211, 212.

Procession of, 60, 212.

the Sanctifier, 329, 330.

the Fruits of, 287.

the extraordinary Gifts of, 287.

the seven Gifts of, 286, 287. Homilies quoted, 259, 260, 329, 374, 389. Hope, 250.

Hours, the Canonical, 245. Image of GOD, the, 160, 161. Immaculate Conception, the, 125. Incarnation, the, 7, 12, 20, 165 etc., 176, 205, 253, etc.,

„ the Doctrine of, 165 etc., 253 etc.

,, apart from the Fall, 168 etc.

,, the Purpose of, 160, 168 etc.

Incense, 357. Indulgences, 89, 94, 194. Infallibility of the Pope, the, 96, 125. Infant Baptism. 262, 369. Inspiration of Scripture, 212, 335 etc, ‘Intention,’ no etc. Intercession of CHRIST, 205 etc.

,, Saints, 222 etc.

Intermediate State, the, 53, 189 etc., 272. Interpretation of Scripture, 124 etc., 347 etc. Invocation of Saints, 223. lona, 75.

Israel, the Children of, 5. James, St., Bp. of Jerusalem, 32, 46. JESUS, the Name of, 178, 363. Jewish Church, the, 5, 15. Jews, the, 5. John Baptist, St., 181. John, King, 84.

Joseph, St., 173, 175, 178 etc., 393. „ of Arimathea, 69, 195, 393. Judgment, 190, 207 etc., 229. Jurisdiction, 113, 114. Justice, 251. Justification, 327 etc. Kalendar, the, 393, etc.

Kneeling, 354, 362.

Lacordaire, 326.

Laity, Priesthood of the, 8, 364 etc., 381, Lambeth Conference, 129.

Last Things, the Four, 227 etc.

Laud, Archbishop, 105.

Law, the Moral, 5, 8, 233 etc.

Lay Baptism, 41.

Lights, Altar, 357.

Likeness of GOD, the, 160, 161.

Lindisfarne, 76.

Liturgies, the Primitive, 225.

LORD’S Prayer, the, 307 etc.

Love, 235, 250.

Love-feast, 281.

Luther, 90.

Macedonius, 139.

Magi, the, 179.

Magnificat, the, 176.

Man, the Creation of, 160.

„ the Fall of, 161. Marriage, 252, 299, 374 etc. Mary, the Blessed Virgin, 167, 170 etc, Mary, Queen, 104. Mass, the Sacrifice of the, 272, 273. Matrimony, Holy, Notes on, 374 etc. Maundy Thursday, 282, 401. Melchisedec, 15. Metropolitans, 44. Ministry of the Church, the, 15 etc. Missions to the heathen, 311. Monasteries, 91, 93. Monica, 224. Monks, the, 91. Moses, 5.

Nag’s Head Fable, the, 105. Nestorius, 175.

New Birth, the, 258, 260, 322 etc. Noah, 4.

Nonjurors, the, Hi. Norman Conquest, the, 83. Notable Duties, the, 243 etc. Notes of the Church, the, 218 etc. Notes on the Church Offices, 369 etc. Nunc Dimittis, the, 178.

Obedience, 164, 249, 312, 320.

Oblation, the Prayer of, 274.

Onesiphorus, 224.

Order, Holy, 297.

Orders, Anglican, 103 etc.

Ordinal of Edward VI., 108 etc.

Ordination, 23, 35, 103 etc.

Origin of Evil, the, 163.

Original Sin, 162, 168.

Ornaments of the church and ministers, 355, 358.

Ornaments Rubric, the, 355 etc.

Oswald, King, 75.

Oswy, King, 79, 81.

Oxford Revival, the, iv.

Paradise, 187.

Parker, Archbishop, 104 etc.

Passion, the, 183 etc.

Passover, the, 265, 280.

Patriarchal System, the, 45.

Paulinus, 74, 262.

Penance, 289 etc.

Pentateuch, the, 339.

Pentecost, 213.

Perseverance, Final, 331 etc.

Peter, St., Promise to, 13, 202.

Peter’s Pence, 85.

Pious Customs, 362 etc.

Pole, Cardinal, 104, 107.

Polycarp, 38.

Pontius Pilate, 185, 197.

Poverty, 248.

Prayer, 244, 303 etc.

„ for the Dead, 98, 224 etc., 272, 378, 379, 401.

,, the LORD’S, 307 etc.

,, objections to, 305 etc. Precepts of the Church, the, 251. Predestination, 317 etc. Presbyters, 29, 35. Priests, 27.

Priesthood of the Laity, the, 8, 364 etc., 381. Primates, 46.

Primacy of the Bishop of Rome, the, 61, 100. Printing, Invention of, iv. 94. Protestant, the term, 219. Protestant Sects, the, 124.

4i 6 General Index.

Provincial System, the, 44. Provisions, 85. Prudence, 251. Purgatory, 89, 194, 270. Puritans, the, iii.

Real Presence, the, 276 etc., 359. Reason, 146.

Redemption, the, 183 etc. Reformation, the, Causes of, 83 etc. „ Results of, 97 etc.

Regeneration, 263, 322 etc. Religion, 8, 303, 354. ” Remembrance of Me,” 267 etc. Repentance, 238, 293 etc. Resurrection of the. dead, 193, 198, 227, 228.

„ CHRIST, 195 etc., 200 etc., 367.

Reunion of the Church, 64 etc. Roman Church, Foundation of the, 37, 46. „ Court, 85, 87, 91. „ Mission, 73, 74. „ See, iii, 13, 95, 9$. Rome, Patriarchate of, 46. Rule of Faith, the, 124 etc., 136.

Sacraments, the, 40 etc., no, in, 215, 253 etc., 328. \,, the Greater, 257 etc., 263.

the Lesser, 257, 259.,, Institution of the, 258.

,, the Seven, 257 etc.

Sacrament of Baptism, 260 etc.

,, Confirmation, 286 etc.

„ the Eucharist, 263 etc.

„ Holy Order, 297.

„ Matrimony, 299, 374.

„ Penance, 289 etc., 387 etc- „ Unction, 300 etc.

Sacrifice, the Eucharistic, 98, 1 10 etc., 206, 207, 266 etc.,

,, of the Mass, 272 etc. * Sacrifices of Masses, the,’ 270 etc. Saints, the Communion of, 220 etc.,, Intercession of, 222 etc.,, Invocation of, 223. Salisbury Missal, the, 358, 393. Sanctification, 329. Satan, 159, 164, 181, 183, 189.

Satisfaction, 297. Saxons, the, 71 etc. Schism, 62.

Scriptures, the Holy, 124 etc., 212, 335 etc, Self-denial, 245.

Self-examination, Form of, 238 etc. Septuagint, the, 341. Sermon on the Mount, the, 8, 234, 243. Sin, 189, 237 etc. Actual, 237. Deadly, 238. Effects of, 237, 318. Forgiveness of, 226, 313, 387 etc. Original, 162, 168, 255. •: Venial, 238. Sms against the Commandments, 238 etc. SPIRIT, THE, Fruits of, 287.

„ Gifts of, 286, 287.

Sponsors, 263, 370. Sunday, the Observance of, 8, 367 etc. Table of Fasts, 403.,, Festivals, 402.,, Forbidden Degrees, 404. Temperance, 251. Temptation of the Angels, 159.,, CHRIST, 181.

Man, 161, 164, 315. Testament, the Old, 339 etc.

the New, 94, 342 etc. Theodore, 82, 387. Theological Virtues, the, 250, 262. Thomas, St., 199. Timothy, 28, 31, 37. Titus, 28, 31.

Tradition, 125 etc., 345 etc. Transfiguration, the, 182.

TRINITY, THE HOLY, 151 etc., 160, 181, 216, 217, 363. Unction of the Sick, 300 etc. Unity of the Church, 57, 58, 63, 218. Valid Ministry, 24, 103.

,, Sacraments, 24, 103. Vestments, the Eucharistic, 356 etc. Vigils, Table of, 403. Virtues, the Cardinal, 250.

, the Theological, 250, 262.

Vows at Baptism, 133, 134, 263, 288. Wesleyan Secession, the, iv. Whitby, Conference at, 79 etc, Wilfrid, 80. Wolsey, 86. Worship, 351 etc. Wounds of JESUS, the, 199, 206. Wycliffe, 94.

A. R. MOWBRAY & CO., LTD., PRINTERS, LONDON AND OXFORD

BY THE SAME AUTHOR

Addresses and Instructions on the Holy Communion

Doctrinal, Practical, and Devotional. Cloth, 2/- net.

Apart with God

Brief Considerations for the Forty Days of Lent. 7 Illus trations. Paper, -$d. net; Cloth, 6d. net. Large type Edition, Paper, I/- net; Cloth, 1/6 net.

The Ceremonial of the English Church

Fourth Edition, containing 16 Illustrations, mostly taken specially for this work. Paper, i/-net; Cloth, 1/6 net, The Christian Character

A Series of Forty short and simple Meditations on the Sermon on the Mount, arranged for the Season of Lent. Paper, gd. net; Cloth, I/- net.

Christian Duty

A Plain Guide to the Knowledge and Practice of Religion. Cloth, flush, 6d. net; Cloth boards, gd. net.

Christian Duty, with Appendix

Cloth, flush, i/- net; Cloth boards, 1/6 net.

Christian Duty, with the Scottish Communion Office

Cloth, flush, gd. net; Cloth boards, I/- net.

Christian Duty and Appendix, together with the Scottish Communion Office Cloth, 1/9 net.

Christian Thoughts for every day in the month, with a Prayer

Wherein is represented the nature of unfeigned Repent ance, and of perfect Love toward God. Reproduced from the original of 1705. Cloth, gd. net.

A. R. MOWBRAY & CO. Ltd.

ADVERTISEMENTS The Christian Way

A Simple Guide to Doctrine, Devotion, and Duty. Cloth, 6d. net; Cloth gilt, &/. net.

Church Customs

Briefly described and simply explained. Paper, 4^. net; Cloth, 6d. net.

The Coming of the Son of Man

A series of brief considerations for the season of Advent. With a Preface by the late Rev. Canon T. T. CARTER. Paper, 6d. net; Cloth, get. net.

The Liturgical Year

An explanation of the Origin, History, and Significance of the Festival Days and Fasting Days of the English Church. Cloth, 3/6 net.

The Natural Religion

With a Preface by the Rev. J. R. ILLINGWORTH, D.D., Bampton Lecturer, 1894. Paper, I/- net; Cloth, 1/6 net.

Plain Words on the Incarnation and the Sacraments of the Gospel

With a Preface by the late Rev. Canon T. T. CARTER. Cloth, I/- net.

The Practical Religion

With a Preface by the late Rev. Canon T. T. CARTER. Fourth Edition. Cloth, I/- net;

Preparation for Confirmation and First Communion Paper, 6d.; Cloth, gd.

The Fatherhood of God

A series of simple instructions arranged for use during the Forty Days of Lent. Paper, 6d. net; Cloth, gd. net.

Short Homilies on the Gospels for the Sundays of the Liturgical Year Cloth, 2/6 net.

A. R. MOWBRAY & CO., Ltd. 28 Margaret St., Oxford Circus, London, W., and at Oxford.

–

BX 5121 S75 1917 TRIN

Staley, Vernon, The Catholic religion

BX 5121 S75 1917 TRIN

Staley, Vernon, The Catholic religion