The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1869-02-03
DEFECTS IN THE ENGLISH REFOR-
NATION.

DEFECTS IN THE ENGLISH REFOR-
NATION.
Strype, in his Life of Grindal, says of that pre-
late that, she remained under some seruples of
conscience about some things, especially the habits
and certain ceremonies required to be used of such
as were bishops" And then follows a remark
which sets forth the principle upon which the Re
formers would have acted had they not been pre-
vented. The author says" For the Reformed in
these times generally went upon the ground. that
in order to complete the freeing of the Church Of
Christ from the errors and corruptiOnS of Rome,
every usage and custom praetised by that idoarOus
Church should be abolished, and that the service
of God should be most simple, stript of all that
show, pomp and appearance that had beeA custom
ariy used before, esteeming all that to be no bet
ter than superstitiOus and anti Christian.
Hume, though an iu6del had no indueement
here to falsify history when he makes this state
ment The forms and ceremonies now preserved
in the English Church, as they bore some resem-
blance to the ancient service, tended further to
reconcile the Catholics to the established religion;
and as the Queen elizabeth permitted no other
mode of worship, and at the same time struck Out
ereTy thing ofeRsiUe to them in the new Liturgy,
even those who were addicted to the Romish com
munion made no scruple of attending the Estab
EShed Church Bishop Maddox remarks that
in the new ecclesiastical arrangements under Ehz
beth there were only 100 parochal clergy displaced
out Of 9,4OO bene6ces
Perhaps there is no where a more explicit deela-
ration or admission rather, on the point before
than is to be found in Bishop Burnet's History of
the Reformation. He says: "0f all Protestant
Churches, the National Church of England most
nearly resembles the Church of Rome. 1t has re-
tanned much of the dogma and much Of the dis.
eiphne Of Roman Catholics Down to the sub
Deacon it has retained the whole of the hierarchy;
and like them, has its deaeonS rural deans chap
tiers, prebendS, arch deaeons, rulers and Wears
liturgy; taken in a great measure from the RO-
man Catholic liturgy, and composed, like that, of
psalms cantlces the three creedS, htanies, Cos.
pels, epistles, prayers and responses. Both
Churches have the Sacraments of baptism and the
eucharist, the absolution of the sick, the burial
service the sign Of the cross in baptism, the re-
seryaton Of confirmation, and order (ordinatiOnl
to bishops" &c.
Now then let US mention in brief what were the
chief objections of the Reformers to the ritual of
the English Church?
, They objected against the requirement of
God.fatheS and God mothers, as unscriptural aud
as taking the responsibility out of the hands of
parents where God had placed it, and as a virtual
denial of the covenant on which infant baptism is
foundssms2naSS.abs baptism not in the 80
n Gods cOve.Sza
butSS ksssnt Of faith and repeS<
promised Jg the chidl But how promised BY !
child ? That is indeed question and the only
answer we can give is that it is through his ireS-
p0asiJle sponsors
Was there not good ground for the objection of
these Reformers2 There is not a shadow of evi
dence in the New Testament to favor the practice
referred to- There is no trace of any other spon-
sors than parents when living and able to present
their children, during the first FIVE hundred years
after Christ, 1t was not until the Council of
Meutz, in the 9th century, that the Church Of
Rome forbade the appearance of parents as spOn-
sors, and required that this service should be sur
rendered into other hands. This refusal of the
natural rights of parents remains to this day in the
Church of England In the Episcopal Church in
the United States their canon provides that par
ents shall be admitted as sponsors fit be desired
So that the influence Of the rule is against admit
ting the parents and their standing sponsors for
their own children in thissolemn sacrament, is only
tolerated. 1t would be easy to show how a leaven
of ROmanism turks within this practise.
p They objected against filling up the calendar
with a multitude of SAINTS Days, which people
were expected to observe relgiously. Where is
therea particle of cOuntenance for this in Scripture?
And yet if we look into the Prayer-book we find
not only long fasts, but also a long Table Of
FeaSts, - movable and immoveable," prescribed.
1t is well known that this practise was borrowed
by the Roman Catholics from the pagan festivals
among the Romans. Is this practise Scriptural,
Protestant, or profitable? Far from all these
just as the worship of saints has ever diminished
the worship of the Saviour, so has the multipGca-
ton of stated fast days aud feast days, in other
words, Of meommaRded holy days, interfered with
the due sancti6cation of the Lords day. Its orr
gin is not in the Scriptures but in paganism, Its
leaven is not that of Christianity but of Popery.
8. They objected against the injunction requiring
all to kpeel at the Lords Supper. The reasons
were because this is not in imitation of Christ who
Supper at table in the ordinary table posture
because kueeing was not praetiSed by the Print
tive Church in the ages Immediately succeeding the
Apostles, but was expressly condemned. 1t is not
pretended that there is an example for it in the
whole history of the Church prior to the 18th cen
tury, when the Papacy had reached the summit in
its system Of corruption 1t did not come into the
Church until the bread in the Sacrament was pre-
tended to be tr1RSubStoRtj0ted into the real natural
body and blood Of Christ Then the people were
eDOined to kneel as an act Of '0orsp paid to this
real presence and person of Christ himself under
the form of bread In King Edwards Liturgy it
was declared that kneeling was not required as an
act Of worship, as if to the body of Christ yet by
Queen Elizabeth command, that explanation was
struck out, for the very purpose that the Papists
might still in the use of the Liturgy of the Church
of England continue to worship their God of
bread. AL that those who wanted the practice
abolished could obtain was an advertisement in the
margin, declaring that by communicating in this
posture no worshipof the elements was intended,
Beza writing to Archbishop Grindal uses the fol-
lowing language of remOnStrance: '' If you have
rejected the doctrine of tranSubstantiatiOn and the
practice Of adOring the host why do you symbol
lie with Popery, and seem to hold both, by kneel.
ing at the sacrament? KneeIng had never been
thought Of had it not been for transubStantiation
To this the archbishop replied, That though the
sacrament was to be received kneeling, yet the
rn r;a ,oaop,onia1 tho Sarv;ca boo~ and ipformed