Imágenes de páginas

of the Real Presence and Sacrifice.

Secondly, that Queen Elizabeth and her advisers in 1558, and the restorers of the Prayer Book in 1662—i. e. the whole Church of England at those dates respectively-are warrant sufficient to allay all suspicion of any special reference in the said symbols to what we disown in the Roman or in the Lutheran doctrine. I may add, that within my own experience the revivers of those usages have been and are found amongst the most earnest deprecators of Transubstantiation and of the Pope's supremacy. It would seem to follow upon these statements-and I understand that there is high legal authority for the opinion-that the onus probandi lies in this matter upon the many who practically ignore or slight the usages (of which number I must confess myself to be one), rather than upon the few who have regularly maintained or recently adopted


In the report presented to Convocation last year, "the committee deem it right further to declare that, in their opinion, the adoption of the usages discussed by them has, as a general rule, had its origin in no other motive than a desire to do honour to the most holy and undivided Trinity, and to render the services of the English Church more becoming in themselves and more attractive to the people................. In the larger number of practices which have been brought under the notice of the committee-they do not say in all of them they can trace no proper connection with the

distinctive teaching of the Church of Rome.


are further of opinion that some advance in ritual is the natural sequel to the restoration and adornment of churches which has so remarkably prevailed during the last twenty-five years, and which is itself closely connected with the revival and growth of religious life during the present century." When the very hastily adopted resolution of the bishops was sent down to the Lower House the preamble was summarily rejected, and the resolution as it stands contains no condemnation of ritual. Till the resolution received the sanction of the Lower House it had-I do not say no legal force, for that we know it has not, but-no moral weight; it was not in any sense the voice of the Church. The refusal of Convocation to condemn ritualism is really a much stronger circumstance in its favour than if the attempt had not been made.

We see, then, from the opinions of two of the most advanced Reformers of old, and of such men as Keble and the members of the Convocation committee, and of Convocation itself, that the ritual question is not the Popish plot some will have it to be. Depend upon it, those men who get up the "No Popery" cry—not our friends who only repeat it second hand, but those, I say, who get it up, are not men whose judgment we can rely on, or whose practices can be set up for our imitation.


['Church Review,' April 4, 1868.]

YDRA-HEADED Protestantism has called the spirits from the vasty deep, and they come obedient to the call. It is needless

to say that the spirits from below are not good angels. They come from back slums, from taprooms, and beer-houses, ready for any evil work in the interests of irreligion, whether it be to overturn a font, desecrate a sacrament, or commit any other blasphemous outrage in the House of GOD. Depraved man, given up to the works of the Devil, is the same everywhere-here or in Italy-only give him the opportunity. A lady who appears to sympathize with the Garibaldini has, notwithstanding her sympathies, given a vivid description of the havoc made at Monte Rotondo-parish registers were torn, the most sacred fittings of the church broken to pieces and destroyed; even the priest's library was involved in the same wanton destruction; like common banditti they drank his wine, and because they could not drink his oil they let

it run to waste. Now, these men were not protestants in the old sense, but in the new or modern interpretation-that is to say, haters of religion, of religion in any form; and the loud clamourers at anti-ritualistic meetings, and the profane utterers of blasphemy, are ready, when the demon of discord is let loose, to do the wicked work of those Garibaldini. It will be useless for the leaders of the movement to try and stem the torrent when once the flood-gates are thrown open; they will be powerless to restrain-nay, they may be themselves involved in-the destruction which will not discriminate between friend and foe,

But, who and what are the leaders? When the question is concerning protestantism pure and simple, apart from the high and lofty aspirations of the now defunct Evangelical school, it is vain to talk of honesty of purpose, or zeal for the truth: protestantism pure and simple has neither faith nor creed, and those who advocate it most loudly need not profess either. Protestantism is essentially the religion of corrupt human nature, or perhaps it would be more correct to say that it is a bad excuse for the absence of religion : such as it is, it is caught at by the indifferent of all classes, who thus try to effect a compromise between both worlds. Protestantism asks the conscience no ugly questions; if it does not heal, it does not lay bare the fretting sore; it conveniently relegates all the outward observances of religion to one day in the week; it permits the reception of the LORD's Supper

without any unpleasant feeling that GOD is near; it denies the existence of a divinely-appointed Church and priesthood; and substitutes an establishment of lecturers. But it is far more easy to say what it is not than to describe what it is. It may believe all the Thirty-nine Articles, or it may disagree with every one of them. Its object is to pull down, and not to build up. It will not lift a finger to preserve one article of the Christian faith; it will use not hands only, but feet, to trample under foot Catholic doctrine. It is not scrupulous either as to the means, and disdains logical argument. One man undertakes to prove that Popery and Paganism are identical; another, that our Book of Common Prayer is Roman, and our clergy Romanizers. Things which are equal to the same are equal to one another, therefore our clergy are pagans. The absurdity of such a conclusion does not strike the writers; or if it does, at any rate they are not ashamed of it. What matters truth when the object is to overthrow truth? If the clergy were really heathens -if they would let sin go unrebuked; if they would tell men that GOD is a GOD far off, who does not care how, or when, or where they come to Him; if they would let their churches remain unused, standing for appearance sake, merely, to make believe that this is a Christian country-then the world and the Devil would shake hands with them, though despising them. Even the Bishops or clergy cannot meet together to consult without a protestant outcry. The Record went

« AnteriorContinuar »