« PreviousContinue »
him that believeth in Jesus ?” In a word, how can we know anything at all about the matter, save by what is declared or manifested to us? Besides this, there is something novel and startling in the assertion ; it is one of those things that, as the Christian Remembrancer, in Number for June, 1838, p. 321, rightly says, causes “ dissatisfaction and uneasiness ;" we look in vain for any similar sentiment in the works of the older and sterling writers of the Church of England, and it seems to me, can be of no use, except to “ set people agog."
If " No Phænix" desires to see more on this matier, I would refer him to the Appendix B, to Russell's Remarks on Keble's Visitation Sermon, and also to the review of that work in the Christian Remembrancer for May, 1837, p. 288. I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
STRICTURES ON ARCHDEACON HARE'S SERMONS. SIR,- 1 most fully concur in the praises you have bestowed on Archdeacon Hare's Sermons. At the same time, while I have little to except against the general tenor of the volume, it contains a statement or two deserving, I think, some reprehension.
In the Visitation Sermon, entitled “ Christ's Promise the Strength of the Church ;” the author attacks the doctrine of the Apostolical Succession. I am not about to defend that doctrine at present, but merely to enter my protest against the unfairness of his representation of it, in the following particulars.
1. He styles it “a notion, which has been brought forward, somewhat prominently, by certain very amiable and pious men, in our days." Now, the younger, and less informed portion of his audience, when they heard these words, could hardly have been led to imagine, that the notion in question has been entertained by nearly every one of our greatest divines. Further on, indeed, we encounter this sentence; “I am aware the interpretation (of Matt. xxviii. 19–30,) I am controverting, has been maintained by some very eminent divines in former times ;" but this is not an adequate acknowledgment of the real state of the case. The more slight and cursory the notice of this subject, (and Archdeacon Hare's is exceedingly so,) the more was he bound to allow that, in decrying the Apostolical Succession, he was differing, not merely from a newly-arisen school, but from the general and prevailing opinion of the church to which he belongs. *
2. He objects, that it “ leads straightway to the most revolting conclusions, according to which, the chief part of Protestant Christendom is cast out at once, by a sweeping interdict, from the pale of Christ's Church, nay, is recklessly declared to stand on a level with the Heathens, and to be left to the uncovenanted mercies of God.” Now, this too, I think wrong, in so cursory a treatment of the subject; inasmuch as the advocates of the succession differ, as to whether, and how far the
* It is true, Archdeacon Hare is professedly attacking only a particular interpretation of a passage in St. Matthew. But he mixes it up with the whole question of the Succession.
VOL. XXII. NO. XII.
results in question follow from it. Before then, Archdeacon Hare can use those results, as a reductio ad absurdum, (supposing them to constitute one), he is bound to prove that the position he attacks does necessarily involve them.
3. Our author falls into the common error of supposing the question to be one relating to forms of church government, and tacitly assumes an identity of result under several forms. When investigated, this common argument against laying such stress on a form, when applied to this subject, will be found to amount to this-Episcopacy being nothing but a form, all the benefits of the New Covenant are to be had without it. Why then lay such stress on it? If the premise be granted, the conclusion does indeed follow, but the premise happens to be the very point to be proved. Were the contest simply about forms of church government, there need not be many words about it. But the question, as I now proceed to show, is one of a totally different character.
The high churchman, then, does not ask whether one form of church government, as such, be obligatory or not; but first, whether spiritual power be or be not exercised in the church ; and secondly, how this spiritual power is conferred. If the office of the christian minister be simply to teach, by the aid of his natural faculties and acquired knowledge, then there would be a fair presumption, in the absence of any assurance to the contrary, that several modes of designation to it might in themselves be equally safe and sufficient. But if his office be not merely to teach-if it be, what Scripture calls it, a ministry of reconciliation” between God and man, involving the possession and demanding the exercise of powers such as no man naturally has, then it becomes a most momentous question how men are to be invested with it, and when and through what channel they receive its accompanying gifts. This is not in the least a question about forms of church government. It is a question, first, as to the existence, and secondly, as to the seat of spiritual power in the church, and is only connected by accident with that of episcopal rule.
These remarks do not in the least pretend to amount to a discussion of the apostolical succession-a subject which has received already such abundant consideration, as to make additional discussion almost impertinent. But when a writer like Archdeacon Hare falls into such misapprehensions in regard to it, as those I have tried to point out, it seems desirable at least to suggest the real question before us. He has also (in my judgment) misconceived a point, if not of equal importance, yet of much greater difficulty, on which I may perhaps make a few observations hereafter.
In the meantime, I beg leave earnestly to warn your younger readers, and all who may be unused to theological study, against an error which is not unlikely to become prevalent—that of confounding all high church principles with the peculiarities of the newly-arisen school of Oxford divines. In designating them a newly-arisen school, I trust I shall not be deemed guilty of any personal disrespect towards men for whom I feel no ordinary amount of admiration and gratitude. But I think it undeniable that some of the opinions which they hold in common with the non-jurors of old, whether true or false, are but
private and peculiar notions; whereas the exclusive authority of the apostolical succession, the grace of the sacraments, and the visible unity of the true church, have been held in common by nearly all the divines of our church who are reputed orthodox, and are fully and clearly set forth in her public formularies : and I consider it most important that attention should be called to this, so that, on the one hand, those who feel a highly natural caution against committing themselves to the peculiarities of a school, may not be thereby deterred from boldly proclaiming the fundamental principles of the church ; and on the other, those who have become convinced of the soundness of these latter, may be warned against rashly proceeding to the former.
THE MORNING OF THE WORLD.
And the tuneful tribes awake
In woodland hoar and dewy brake,
When bees, with thighs unladen, from the cells,
Dive in the blooming bells;
They dream'd not then on storms that were to be,
So the sun shone upon them pleasantly,
As daring not to gaze with stedfast eyes
On unreveal’d and dreadful mysteries,
THE EVENING OF THE WORLD.
Melancholy musings fill
All the heart against the will,
Aye though the sun go redly to his rest,
In golden colours drest,
(For now we surely know it shortly dies,
Who in the changeful light of sunset skies
Though well assur'd the promis'd morn shall rise,
Big with assurance breaking on our eyes,
No. LXXV. PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD.
(Extract from Judgment by Lord Langdale, M.R., in the Attorney-General v.
Fishmongers' Company, 2 Bevan C. C. p. 151.) Soon after the statute of Edward VI. minute examination of the doctrine of questions arose, sometimes upon the the Church of England respecting uses which were to be deemed super- prayers for the souls of the dead; the stitious within the statute, and more question is, whether the uses to which frequently upon the effect of the statute the testator has directed his property in giving to the Crown either the land, to be applied in perpetuity are such as the rents of which were to be applied to vest the land, or the monies apto the uses, or only the sums of money plicable to the uses directed by the which had been annually applied to will, in the Crown, according to the the uses, and upon that subject, some intent and true effect of the statute of distinctions which may appear rather Edward VI. And although prayers nice were made ; but it seems to me for the souls of deceased persons might that the case of Adams o. Lambert, not, according to the doctrines of the as reported by Coke and by Moore, Church of England, be necessarily and several of the authorities there connected with the doctrine of purgacited, and the case of Pitts v. James, as tory; and although it might not be reported by Rolle, and other cases considered as an ecclesiastical offence to cited in Duke, cannot be read without pray for the souls of deceased persons, coming to the conclusion, that esta- or request others to do so, (upon blishments or foundations for securing which points I do not think it necesprayers for the souls of the dead were
sary to express any opinion at this deemed to be superstitious, and within time) ; yet it might nevertheless, as I the statute of Edward VI.
conceive, be properly deemed superIn the argument for the relators, it stitious to create an establishment, or was urged that the directions to which endow a foundation, to be continued I have referred are only directions to in perpetuity, and conducted with cerpray for the souls of the dead ; that tain ceremonies supposed to be resuch directions are not unlawful, and ligious, for the purpose of securing the are not, and never have been, pro- perpetual continuance of prayers for hibited by the Church of England ; and ihe souls of the dead, either alore, or were not deemed to be superstitious at in connexion with other observances the time when the statute of 1 Edward within the express terms of the act; VI. was passed. It does not appear and it appears to me that the question to me to be necessary, for the purpose has been determined by authority. of deciding this case, to enter into a
SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. Our readers will be glad to hear highly gratifying. It is understood that the Secretary, Mr. Tomlinson, that a report will shortly be made to has returned from Constantinople, and the Foreign Translation Committee, although circumstances have prevented and the result of Mr. Tomlinson's his proceeding to Syria, we are in- mission will, we presume, be laid beformed that his reception, both at fore the Board in January. Athens and Constantinople, has been
SOCIETY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL. During the summer and autumn, tol, Hereford, Lincoln, Norwich, Ripon, public meetings on behalf of the
and Derry. Society have been held in various parts The number of District Associations of England and Ireland ; and to show was in 1838, 200; 1839,310; 1840,400. how entirely they have been sanctioned Income of the Society from Volunby the heads of our Church, it is satis- tary Contributions during the last four factory to state, that they have been presided over by the following prelates
£9,407 in their respective dioceses : the Arch
10,752 bishops of Canterbury, York, Armagh,
16,082 and Dublin; the Bishops of London,
23,443 Durhaın, Winchester, Worcester, Ex- The Receipts up to the 31st Oct. of eter, Salisbury, Gloucester and Bris- the present year were 35,3001.
NATIONAL SOCIETY. In an admirable letter written by English particles, though in a different the Rev. J. Sinclair, to one of the way from the popular method which I Managers of a National School, the have described. They are especially following most important remarks on acquainted with theological terms, and the subject of imparting religious they do not find that knowledge to exknowledge, occur:
cite in their own minds a prejudice “But your most serious grounds against mysteries. They see clearly of opposition remain to be removed, the distinction between explaining a and are those which concern religion mystery, and explaining the terms in and morality. As regards religion, which it is expressed. Unless the you insist that the explanatory method terms are understood, no idea whatever is inconsistent with those doctrines of is conveyed, and consequently the Christianity which contain mysteries ; doctrine remains to all intents and purthat a child trained up upon the system I poses, as if it had never been revealed am advocating, and accustomed to have at all. A young person instructed on everything brought down to the level the explanatory method, may be made of his capacity, will be wanting in that to perceive more distinctly than any faith unfeigned—that spirit of docility other the actual boundaries to which —that reverence for authority, which all human knowledge is necessarily Christ enjoins, and which our own restricted. What he sees, he sees Church is so peculiarly solicitous to clearly ; and therefore he can tell how maintain. If this effect resulted of far he sees. He is prepared accordnecessity from the etymological sys- ingly to receive the assurance that tem, I should at once abandon it; but there is much beyond the sphere of you will not, I think, find many of my mortal vision; and is peculiarly capareverend brethren ready to agree with ble of comprehending the distinction you in the suspicion that grammar and between what may and what cannot etymology are dangerous to religion. be known; between what may be exAn academical education has made plained, and what admits of no explathem well acquainted with the force of nation."
CHURCH BUILDING SOCIETY. A MEETING of the Committee was chapel of ease at Tean, in the parish of held, Nov. 16. Present: the Rev. Chickley, Stafford; building a new Dr. D'Oyly (in the Chair), the Rev. church in Every street, Manchester ; Drs. Shepherd, J. Lonsdale, B. Harri- in the parish of Allhallows on the son, and J. Jennings; H. J. Barchard, Wall, Exeter; in St. George's, SouthA. Powell, J. Cocks, and N. Connop, wark; the purchasing of a building to jun. Esqrs.
be rendered appropriate for an EpiscoAmong other business transacted, palian chapel at Falmouth, Cornwall; grants were voted towards building a building a chapel at Knighton, Han