The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-06-13 00:00:00

31 elaborate " Essay on the

" by Mr. Richardson, which

is well worth perusal. "Tricks on the
read by all who aspire to become

Turf " should be

"knowing ones

Farmer devotes much space to " Manuring." Several very
interesting reports of farmers' cicbs appear. Papers on
mildew, on see,l sowing, feeding horses, agricultural ex-

perimeats, cultivation of clover, on seed sowing, &c., should
be read with attention. Count de Gourey's tour is con-
tinued.

TIIE TERM " CATHOLIC'

'-BAPTISM

rian doctrine. there is one

point in some del

which we

a•e already alluded,

but which we

particularly notice before we enter into the detail of th
Tractarian innovations, because it seems to us to he a stron
symptom of that indirect approximation to Romanism which
ig our main objection to the whole Traetorian-system—we
mean the prominent and emphatic reverence with which they
use the term Catholic, contrasted with the low, disparaging,
and even repudiating tone in which everything Protestant is

mentioned.
All Christians using the Apostles' Creed acknowledge
themselves to be members of one holy Catholic or Universal
Church ; and so " all who profess and call themselves Chris-
tians" are, in this view of the matter, and according to the
interpretation of our Liturgy, Catholics. But the Roman
Church, which acknowledges no salvation out of its own
pale, which recognises no other Church than itself, and
treats all the rest of Christianity as heretics, arrogates to

itself the exclusive title of Catholic. The premises are false,
but the conclusion is logical ; and they who believe they are
the only Church may very naturally pride themselves in the
title of Catholic. On the other hand, the Reformed Churches
have never pretended to be exclusively Catholic ; and while
they denied the Church of Rome to be the Catholic, they
admitted it to be a Catholic Church : they therefore were

not very zealous in stickling for a name, which being, in
their view, common to all, could be no distinction to any ;

and they; protesting against t

ae errors and

ogrifice of

share with Popery. The result of all this was that, through-
out Europe, the Roman and Reformed Churches were popu-
larly contra-distinguished as the Catholic and Protestant
Churches; and even in England—though, when more strict-
ness was called for, we talked of the " Roman Catholics "
we heard, in common parlance, of nothing but the Catho-
lics"—" Catholic Emancipation"—the " Catholic question"

be Catholic religion

and so forth

It was in this

state of things that those pious persons, to whom we have
already alluded, thought it expedient to remind the Church
of En:land of her own claims to the title of Catholic, and
began to call her the Catholic Church in a manner more em-
phatical and peculiar, and wore in the style of the Romish
pretensions, than the Anglican Church had ever before
heard of. Our old divines, indeed, in their controversies
with the Romish theologians, who insisted on their own
Catholicism as a proof of our heresy,• retorted upon them
that we were " as Catholic and even more Catholic than
they,"* and always insisted that we were a Catholic Church
in doctrine, though our proper denomination was the Angli-
can Church. This innovation—or, rather, this equivocal
applicatio❑ of an ohl term—though, on maturer consi-

deration, it appears to have been at first unnecessary,
and eventually mischievous—met, as we all know, a pretty
general acquiescence, and was adopted by parties in the
Church of England who agreed in that alone. Those who
originally broached it, did so, we have now reason to suspect,
with the view of facilitating our return to the doubtful tra-
ditions and obsolete usages of early times (which, if rich in
piety, were pitiably over-tinctured with superstition), and of
so far, at least, approximating to what Rome calls Catholic-
ism. On the other hand, the most zealous antagonists of
Rome were very ready to strip her of whatever authority or
reverence the exclusive title of " Catholic" might he supposed
to confer. So that the most opposite opinions seemed to
-concur on this new nomenclature, and we ourselves on more
than one occasion, as our readers may have observed, did not
hesitate to employ this now popular denomination ; but we
did so,- certainly, with no view either of approximating to-
wards or of further receditb, from Rome. We need not here
enter into any critical or theological examination of the vari-
ous senses which ingenious men have given to this term—
which, be it observed, is a merely secular word, not occur-
ring anywhere in the Holy Scriptures. Suffice it to say that
the Church of England uses it as it was used in the earliest
r,pa of the Christian Church—as neatly srtirmyrnmis with

orthodox ,f and as designating that apostolic Church to n hich
in the Apostles' Creed we profess our devotion ; but when,
in the further development of the system in which this appa-
rently innocent innovation took its rise, we saw that the title
thus emphatically bestowed on the Church of England was
on many important occasions used in the peculiar sense given
to it by the Church of Rome—when auricular confession was
talked of as Catholic—when a more rigid observance of fasts
than had been usual in the Church of England was preached
up as Catholic—when the priest's praying with his back to
the people, contrary to every form and principle of" common
prayer," was recommended and practised as Catholic—when

burning tapers at noonday on the communion-table of
English•parish-church was pronounced to be Catholic--,wl

we heard of a bishop interfering to rebuke a clergyman for
having „a. sort of cross sewed on the back of his surplice, by
way of conforming to Catholic example—when we heard of
an English clergyman actually proceeding with a crucifix in
his hand to administer the sacrament to a dying parishioner
more Catholico—when the Church of England was described
to be in a state that required " means of recovery and re-
establishment to make her a pure branch of the Catholic
Church"—when. in short, we saw both ceremonies and doc-
trines which have hitherto distinguished the Roman from the
Protestant Church, all deliberately patronised and systema-
tically characterised as Catholic—how could common sense
resist the conviction that the word Catholic was by this new
school used in a meaning to which the Church of England
never can subscribe? Who could doubt that the term so ap-
plied was used not in honour and reverence of the Church of
England ; but, on the contrary, in diminution of her autho-
rity, and in countenance of the old papal anathema that our
Reformation was no better than an anti-Catholic—that is,
an anti-apostolical and anti-Christian heresy ? . It is, there-
fore. not the use but the abuse of this term, coupled with so
many more than suspicious circumstances, that excites our
distrust. For our own parts we cannot better express our
opinion on this point than in the words of Archbishop
Secker:--
" Churches that differ widely in several notions and
customs may, notwithstanding, each of them be truly
Catholic churches. But the Church of Rome, which is one
of the most corrupted parts of the Catholic church, both in
faith and love, bath presumed to call itself the whole Catholic
church—the universal church; which it no more is than one
disjased limb, though perhaps the larger for being diseased,
is the whole body of a man ; and by attempting to exclude
us, they take the direct way to exclude themselves, unless
God impute their uncharitable way of thinking and acting,
as we hope he will, to excusable ignorance and mistake. The
Church of England pretends not indeed absurdly to be the
whole Catholic church, but is undoubtedly a sound and ex-
cellent member of it. So that we have much better ground
to call ourselves Catholic than they, were such names worth
disputing about—WHICH THEY AEE NoT ; only one would
not flatter and harden theta by giving thorn a title which they
both claim unjustly, and turn into an argument against us."
_Seeker's Fourteenth Lecture on the Catechism, Works,
139. , . . .

Another practice, of more importance (than the mode of
presenting the sacramental elements), which had nearly
fallen into desuetude, has been recently revived, in stricter
compliance with the Rubrics—we mean the performance of
the rite of baptism in the course of the ordinary service, and
before the whole congregation. Great stress has been laid
on this point by those who practise it, for the reasons alleged
in the Rubric itself :
" The people are to be admonished, that is most con-
venient that baptism should. not be administered but upon
Sundays and other holy days, when the most number of

people come together; as far that the congregation there
present may testify the receiving of them that be newly
baptized into the number of Christ's church ; as also be-
cause in the baptism of infants every man present may be
pnt in remembrance of his own profession made to God in
his baptism."
This portion of the Rubric has existed ever since the first
book of King Edward ; but, until the last revision in 1662,
it was preceded by these words:—
" It appeareth by ancient writers, that the sacrament of
baptism in the old time was not commonly ministered but at
two times in the year—at Easter and Whitsuntide—at which
times it was openly ministered in the presence of all the
congregation; which custom now being grown out of use
r.lit,,,noh it cannot. for many considerations, be well restored

sin), it is thought good to follow the same as near as
nveniently may_be. _ Wherefore the people are to be ad••

-Co-onisbed

as above.

This preface to the rite, which is to be found in tbe Prayer-
Books of Edward VI., Elizabeth, James 1., and Charles 1.,
was omitted at the Restoration—we suppose, as being rather
historical than rubrical; but it is still worth remembering.

Then follows the Rubric now insisted on as to the time of
celebration :

" And then the godfathers and godmothers, and the people
with the children, must be ready at the font, either immedi-
ately after the last lessaft at„evening prayer, as the priest at

This is very clear; "and yet, like the early ceremony, " it
had grown out of use ;" and some, who are nevertheless very
zealous nthricans in other points, doubt whether, "for many
considerations, it can be restored."

The Bisbop of London says nothing exactly as to the time
of baptism :-- _

liaptism is never to be administered in private houses,
except in cases of urgent necessity ; and all such baptisms
should be duly registered within the time prescribed by law.
This I request you to take as my authoritative direction."—
Charge, p. 63.