The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-02-04 00:00:00

IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.

" A heavy blow and great discouragement" was on
Friday inflicted on the Romanising party, by the judg-
ment of Sir Herbert Jenner Ftist, in the stone-altar and
credence-table question, raised by the Cambridge Camden
Soci, ty.

No doubt remains, we believe, from the known perti-
nacity of the party, that the question will be carried to a
higher court, by appeal, and, in fact, will be fought with
a desperation to mark their sense of its importance. But
more than half the battle is won by this decision. The
charsct.-r of the learned judge—his entire freedom from
" low church" predilections—and the care and attention
which he has bestowed on the question, render it exceed-
ingly improbable that his decision will be disturbed by the
court of appeal.

The Ro.m. anisers, however, do unquestionably regard
this question as one of the last importance to then• cause.
An eminent Tractarian, in a western county, was con-
versing, a short time back, with a neighbouring clergy-
man, on the dissensions in the church ; and he plainly ex-
pressed his regret that so much commotion should have
been raised about surplices and offertories, and prayers
for the church militant, and other matters which he had
sense enough to perceive to be in themselves of small im-
portanm " But," said he, " upon the question of the
altar I would take my stand. That is a point which we
can never concede, for in it is involved a doctrine of first-
rate importance. The momentous character of the suit
in Doctors'-commons it is impossible to overrate."
And he was right in this estimate. Any one who con-
sults Dr. Cardwell's valuable collections, will see the
earnestness with which the reformers of Edward's and
Elizabeth's days bent their attention to the pulling down
altars, and placing communion-tables in their room. And
thr mai❑ step to the restoration of the mass—if it be ever
restored—must unquestionably be the restoration of the
altar on which it is to be offered up.
These two different and opposite lines of thought and
action are perceptible even to the eye of a child. In the
New Testament, and in the CoMmon Prayer Book, we
find a supper—a communion, and, of course, a table.
But in the Romish church we find a sacrifice—a sacri-
fice offered up—a priest, a sacrificing priest, to offer it—
and a propitiation for the sins of the living and the dead
included in that sacrifice.

Now of these two distinct and opposite lines we must
choose one. If we prefer to abide by the scriptures and
the Church of England, we have then a supper; and, of
course, we must have a table. Any one who looks at the
Prayer Book will see that our reformers carefully exclu-
ded the word " altar," and used the word " table," in a
dozen places where a Romanist would have taken the ex-
actly opposite course. And we cannot diverge from this
plain course ; we cannot take back the " altar" without
distinctly implying that we mean to revert to "the sacri-
fice," " the priest," and the " propitiatory offeting"
again.

-However, thanks to the care snd fidelity of Sir Herbert
Jenner Fust, this danger is for the present averted. Let
this judgment be confirmed, as we doubt not it will be, in
in the court above, and thus become the settled law of
the church, and a barrier will be erected against the
efforts of the Romanisers, which will foil their most stre-
nuous exertions.