The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1867-08-20 00:00:00

MB. WILLIAMS'S CRITIQUE OF THE
SALISBURY MEETING.

To the Bdilor.

Dear Sir,—lt is very important in any subject which
we discuss, and especially in thoological eontroversy,
that we should understand the meaning of the terms
employed. In • letter be Mr. Williams, which appeared
in the Salisbury avid Winenester Journal, I see that
much of his argument turns upon the sae and meaning
of three terms, sacrament, priest, and altar. He make'
a quotation from Bishop Ridley upon the first, to which
I and all the clergy of our church will say, Ames.
And here let roe congratulate Mr. Williams upon hie
readiness to submit to the opinions of our great divines
of the Reformation period, for o.ey have of late been
too much underrated, and to their writings, taken in
connesion with the Holy Scriptures, to which they
(Article vi.) invariably appeal, must we refer, if we
would tightly interpret their Prayer Book. And I hope
that further acquaintance with their words will lead
Mr. Williams to see the truth of God as clearly as, by
divine grace and study M God's word, thee were enabled
to grasp it.
Other passages from Bishop Ridley's examinations
might be quoted, but as Mc. Williams Mere to Arch-
bishop Cranmer, one of the chief oompilers of our Liturgy,
I and whose views were identical with those of Ridley
I upon these points, I should be glad if he will look "into
the preface to the Reader (See Parker's Society Edition,
Creamer), dated 1531," and 'Axed to his book on the
Sacrament of the Lord's Sapper, which he wrote in
answer to the Romish Bishop Gardiner. In this preface
us words which are the key to the right understanding
of this important controversy. "Sometime by this word
sacrament I mean the whole ministration and receiving
of the sacraments, either of Baptism or the Lord's
Supper: and so the old writers many times do say, that
Christ and the Holy Ghost be preesot in the maramente ;
not meaning by that manner of speech that Christ and
the Holy Ghost be present in water, bread, or wine
(which be only the outward visible sacraments), but that
In the due ministration of the suramente according to
Christ's ordinance and institution. Christ and his Holy
Spirit be truly and indeed present by their mighty and
sanctifying power, virtue, and graft, in all them that
worthily receive the same." Bee also the rest of the
"Preface" to the same effect.

Now be it mmembered, that this preface was prefixed
to the second edition of Creamer's work, only in the
year preceding the sewed Prayer Book of Edward VI.,
the same Prayer Book which we now have ; and that
the Archbishop here explains the meaning of the terms
which be used in his book on the sacraments. And to
show how highly this book of Creamer's was esteemed
by his co-reformers, we find good old Bishop Latimer
frequently referring to it in his disputation (held at
Oxford, In 1554, before his martyrdoos) as my Lord of
Canterbury's book. (See Parker's Society, Latimer,
p. 491).
Therefore when we read the word "sacrament" in
the writings of the old divines we must be careful to
distinguish between sacraments, as the bread and wine,
or the mere outward signs, and the whole celebration or
ceremony of the encharist (for it is in the latter sense
that Ridley spoke in Mr. quotation), other-
wit* we may misapprehend our Reformers' meaning, as
Mr. Williams hu misunderstood Ridley's words.
It is thou of little service to the elucidation of this
subject to bring forward 1000 such queues as that
quoted from Bishop Ridley by Mr. Williams, for we are
agreed, as all our divines argue, that there is a real
presence of our tgrased Lord in the sacrament, but only
to thou who worthily receive the same.
. . . . .

—With regard to the "mutation" or change in the
character of the breed and wine referred to by Bishop
Ridley, it must be taken in harmony with his teaching
In other places—it is relative, not absolute—represents.
the, not reel.
Creamer explains this point thus (Creamer on the
Sacrament, p. 54) :—"They (the Romanists) say that
Christ is corporally under or in the form of bread and
win.; we my that Christ i 4 not there, neither corporally
nor spiritually; but in them that worthily eat and
drink the brood and wine, Hs Is epiritually, and cor-
porally in heaven."
There wee no difference of opinion upon these doctrines
between Creamer and his brethren, and bemuse they
would not admit that Christ is either spiritually or cor-
porally in or under the form of bread and wine in the
sacrament, they were burnt to death, which was Rome's
mode of silencing her opponents. In fact the gist of
the whole question is hare. The real presence' is it in
the heed or in the heart? We say with Latimer
(Latimer's Works, P. 267). "Christ gave the sacraments
both, month, his body to the mind." To this agree the
reformers of ;Edward VLth's and Elizabeth's reign, and
ill 00060E11MM with this exposition our Prayer Book,
Articles, and Homilies must be understood.
But secondly, as to the term "Priest." Priori is only
an abbreviation of the Greek word presbyter, or elder—
thus, presbyter, preeter, priest; and so it is used in
our Liturgy, ea distinct from demon. It is absurd to
build up any argument upon the use of this term in the
Litany and other pianos in the Prayer Book, so as to
favour the Romish notion of a rerificing priesthood,
apart from the sense in which the New Testament does
apply the term priesthood and priests in the sacrificial
eucharistic MON to the whole body of the church
myyticel. (1 Pet. ii. 9; Rev. i. 6).
The terms "Sacrifice," "Priest," "thy,. used in the
' Jewish or legal sense, are essential to the Romish and
Ritualistic systems, which stand or fall with them ; but
they are utterly repudiated by Holy Scripture and our
own Church in that sense.
Ritualism, which calls the post communion declaration
"the Black brie," and the 39 articles "forty stripes
save one," would have given us a very different Prayer
Book from the one we use. Let us not be carried away
by a false charity to parley with heresy. We are not
*Ousted by any "fussy intolerance" in opposing
ritualistic innovations. These questions art matters of
life and death to the Church. So thought • godly and
learned man, now at rest, my dear friend and for many
years private tutor, the Rev. James Beholsfield, Regius
Professor of Greek in Cambridge, and editorial secretary
to the Parker's Society, in publishing the works of our
reformer,. Thirty years ago before a party of clergy
met in my hones to comsat upon the then budding
ritualism in traolarianiam. he thus spoke :—“The
Treetesiens, like the Papista, pervert the glorious
doctrine of the Trinity, for they put the Priesthood in
place of the Father, the Chun* in the plus of the Boa,
and the Sacraments in pleas of the Holy Ghost." He
"Wine deed yet sgsaketh."
We maintain WA Christie the only "000ritlao" "once"
and for all "offered." Christ is the only priest, in It.
true and sacrllletal masa, the Ilelehinedite Priest, whose
priserfkood_is Hob. 23, morg.rimponsablo,"noftwoo-
liosAL Moho, J•Wig, La answer so the Romanist

Harding, says (Jewel, p. 720, Parker's Society). "If
Yr. Harding make the selfsame "sacrifice that Christi
made upon the cross, then he is a priest after the order
of Ilelehiaedee, and so king of justice, the prince of
peace, and • priest for ever, without successor, for these
titles belong to the priesthood of Melchisedee." With-
out the same he cannot offer up the IMO sacrifice 'that
Christ offered upon the cross."
8o spoke Jewel, Bishop of Salitbury, 300 years ago,
whom the giest Hooker pronounced "the worthiest
divine that Christendom bath had for the space of some
hundred. of years."
Itot thirdly, we maintain that Christ is the only
" Altar ;" and Imre I must deny that the term "
in Heb. •iii. 10, has any reference to the Communion
table. Evidently it refers typically to Christ as the
"Altar," The apostle is speaking of that altar, Lev.
iv. 12 and avi. 1427, which was called the altar of sin
offering, is which case the blood of the victim was to
be sprinkled arid its fat burnt upon the sitar: but the
entire body was to he carried forth, and wholly burnt
without the camp or city of Israel Ge this particular
sacrifice, he says, "they, who serve the tabernacle, have
no right to sat." Now, by those '' who serve the
tabentaido" are meant the priest of the old law, who
, might partake anther sacrifices, but of no portion of
this might they eat. Hence the apostles draw two
eonclusions—lst, that meat• "have not always profited
them that have been occupied therein," ie., the Jewish
priests, and therefor* that Chaistians must not doe*
upon them; and secondly, that as Christ, the ire"
antitypical altar, or victim, went forth, and "suffered
without the gate," so must Christians "so forth unto
Him without the camp" (i c., out of a wicked world)
"hearing his reproach."
It would be sheer wresting of the Scriptures to ea 7
that the word "Altar" here means • Communion table.
Oar Church, following Holy Scriptures, craned the
word "Altar" from the Prayer Book, and substituted
table, the them indicated by the Holy Ghost (1 Cor,
a. 21). Bishop Ridley ordered every atone altar in his
Diocese of London to be romoved, and put on the
floor at the entrance of the Church (2 Kings, miii. 4).
He called it "Nehastrui." Observe how St. Paul uses
the two terms "Altar" and "Table" in their proper ,
menses in 1 Gm, a. 18 and 21.
_ _ .

Kr. Williams blues* Mr. Pears for glorying in the
nuns of "Protestant,' My idea of Protenant is, "OM
who bean witness to God's Truth against error." A
Protestant is • witness. The Church of Christ is,
like her Lord and Muter, a witness (see Heb. xli. I •
Rev. 13. Greek; Rev. 5.; iii.. 14, kw.) She hai
to bear wither, i.e., to" protest," against the three
prevailing forms of iniquity continuing threeghout
this disperreatten, symbolised by the three wild
of Revelation, viz., Imperial Pagan Rome (oh. xii). ;
Imperial Papal Rome (ch. sill.). and Rome Papal with-
out temporal power (sir. evil. 7.3., i.e., uncrowned),
and for this, her faithfal witness, she will reign with her
Lord (Rev. xx. 4 6).
Ritualism is but Popery in the bud: and being fully
persuaded, in agreement with our Homilies and our
martyred Reformers, that Popery is the great
"Apostasy," headed by "the man of sin" (2 Then. Ii),
and Babylon fore-doomed of God. I glory in the
Protestant character of our Church ; and as that fallen
and apostate °harsh of Rome denkw our orders, and has
perverted God's troth, so I say, no pesos with Rome,
nor with Rome's counterfeit,. The Pope anathematims
me, our clergy, our bishops, archbishops, Queen, and
whole Church. We return not earring for cursing, but
solemnly appeal to the words of our common Lord,
blister, and Judge, who in allusion to "Babylon,"
gives his people this solican charge:—" Corns out of
her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her she,
and that ye receive not of her plagues." And let the
members of our beloved "Protestant" Church give
heed to the words of the inspired &poet!' to the
Galatians, "Stand fast in the liberty with which Christ
bah made us free, and be not entangled again with the
yoke of bondage." (Gal. V. 1).
Having, I fear, exhausted your patienoe and that of
your readers, I must reserve, with your permission, for
another letter, my answer to Mr. Williams'. remarks
upon absolutioa and schism; but permit me to say one
word in conclusion, in answer to another of your
correspondents, who would exclude a churchersrden,
who is not learned, from forming an opinion
upon these point& Hue not a churchwarden a
soul to save, as well as the learned and can your
correspondent show that the knowledn of even the deep
Things of God I. confined to the learned • yea, rather
the contrary. The unlearned man an read Ids Bible
with prayer for that Spirit's teaching which Is promised
by his Lad. He will no be enabled to distinguish
between things that differ; and he may take his ground
upon the simple English Bible, and clearly see the
faller:km of too many learned clerics, who mystify them-
selves with the words and wisdom of human tradition.
But it requires no learning in any man who has eyes in
his head to diarsern, by certain unmistakable gestures,
postures, dresses, and novel additions to our Church
services an I:ceremonials, that matters are not right in
Iris Church. "Straws show which way the wind
blows;" and if the churchwarden sees these ominous
straws, he looks out and prepares for the coming sto-m.
He knows that these straws have a moaning, and what
they nem? too! .

Sir, have unhappily watabed the gradations, the
crossed &must the table, and the adoration before the
_ .

Al;;r,'"-In-tirTio—u;;;;;p7";;irm 71 ;pe—r:
atition has lapeed into "the" great "apostacy," and has
fallen Weep in the lap of the Glee aoromess.
I am, dear Sir. yours very faithfully, • Presbyter of
the Church of England, and, I trust, • mane.. for
Christ, R. If. CHATFIELD.
Woodford Vicarage, Seliabary, Aug. 13, 1867.