The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1874-12-23

1900 rejected divines in 1862, they hav
loved the Episcopal Church, its ways, its sci
vices they have believed it to be churc
of reformers, and like the Pilgrims them
selves they have talked of "our Mothe
Church" and yet the best of them, the mos
pious, the most earnest, have always beer
bitterest with regard to some of the expires
sions of the Prayer Book. They hav
sought for relief, they have petitioned tn
General Convention for that relief. In 1866
they asked for the repeal of a certain canon
80 that the word priests might be interpreted
to mean presbyter. They also asked that
in regard to certain word in the order o
Baptism, it might be allowable for the cler
gy to omit it.
AS far as I remember their petitions were
not even considered, but at the close of tina
Convention one of the noblest of them, anC
yet one of the strongest opponents of this
Reformed Episcopal Church, said to me
THE result of the Convention of 1868 is al
restriction on the one side and no belief on
the other" They came back to the Con.
vention Of 1871 with the same petitions, and
we're 5iis{aiiy received. z remember ia the
House of Bishops the Chairman of the Com.
mittee on the Prayer Book, the distinguished
Bishop of Virginia, himself an EVangelican
churchman, came into the house with these
petitions in his hand, and reported that the
Committee thought it inexpedient to recon-
mend any action, and asked to be discharged,
and the petitions were not even allowed to
be printed in the appendix. These same di-
vines came back to the Convention of 1874.
The Diocese of Virginia asked the General
Convention to inquire whether the institu-
tion-ofice was part of the Prayer Book.
So far as know it was not even considered.
Everything was denied, everything refused
that evangelical men asked. The reply of
the Convention was like the reply of Jero-
boam to the people of Israel: "My little
finger shall be thicker than my fathers loins (;
and whereas my father chastised you with
whips, l will with scorpions" The day has
been closed forever against any relief to the
troubled consciences with that church.
FAILURE TO APPLY A REMEDY FOR RITUALIsM.
But to pass to the third fault of that Con-
vention, perhaps the most important of all,
l refer to the failure to provide all adequate
remedy for Ritualism. The first alarm in
this country in regard to Ritualism began in
1866, when declaration was drawn up and
signed by twenty-eight Bishops against cer-
tain practices which had crept into the
Church. In the Convention of 1868, the
subject was again brought up and discussed,
but without any action. In 1871, you re-
member the discussion when both canons
prepared in the House of Bishops for this
purpose were defeated in the House of Dep.
uties. When the Convention of 1874 came,
it was felt that something must be DONE
The evil had grown year after year. At
first, men said We were needlessly alarmed.
1t would soon pass away; it was only the
passion of the hour; but steadily it grew,
deepened, and strengthened The Conven-
ton of 1874 found it must do something.
They passed a canon on Ritualism to de-
stroy Ritualism. 1t has been received with
great eclat, and it is thought that at last we
have reached point where the Episcopal
Church is determined to put down Ritualism.
If so, it is very significant fact that week
before last THE Church Journal of this city,
in its editorial with regard to the canon and
the action of the Convention, said: Nobody
wants to see Ritualist tried, and it adds,
I" there will no troubling of anybody" And
that is the result of the whole legislation.
But examine the canon for moment. 1t
is aimed at one end and one only-the ser
vices at the administration of the Lords
Supper. Everything else is ignored. Affairs
may be erected still in every church, stone
affairs, which the Reformers cast out at the
Reformation. Colored vestments may be
worn; professions and recessions may 60 on
with surpliced choirs. Bowings toward the
altar are still allowed when there are no ele.
ments upon it, more terrible form of idola-
try than if they were there. All these are
utterly ignored. One single evil seems to
have been aimed at-that is, eucharistic
alteration, alteration of the elements of bread
and wine.
Is that Ritualism? No, no; it's only the
last poisoned flower on the tree. We great
ly mistake the real life within this system if
we think eucharaStic alteration is Ritualism.
Ritualism is only one thing, condensed in
one word-sacerdotalism-the doctrine that
there is priesthood in the Christian minis
try, sacrifice in the Lords Supper, an al
tar in the Lords Table. This is Rtualsm
not developed, it is true, but the root, the
germ, from which all else is logically devel-
oped. Now, this error is in the Prayer Book
in the Protestant Episcopal Church. Open
the Prayer Book at morning prayer. "The
minister" it says, shall give the morning
prayer by reading one or more of the follow
ing sentences. He reads the Exhortation
and the Confession. The moment the Con,
fession is done the "minister" disappears.
The "priest' rises. The word, you see, is
changed. The "priest" stands in the priest
ly attitude, pronounces the Absolution, then
passes on to the communion service. The
"minister" begins, but when he comes to
the table the "priest" shall place upon the
table the bread and the wine. The priest
shall lay his hand upon the bread and the
cup to consecrate them. Then the Institu.
ton Office. There this system of sacerdotal
ism is still more marked and pronounced
There we find the terms "sacerdotal rela
tion," sacerdotal connection" "sacerdotal
functions" We find the word "altar" ap.
piled again and again to the Lords Table
Then we pass on to the last evidence of this
sacerdotaliSm in the Prayer BOok-the Or
dination services. When the Bishop lays
his hands on the head of the candidate for
presbyter's orders he uses these words: "Re.
ceive the holy Ghost" "Receive the Holy
Ghost through these hands" is meant. Fear
full words! Spoken once by the Son of God
to the Apostles; never to be snoken again