diff --git "a/data/test/30909.txt" "b/data/test/30909.txt" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/data/test/30909.txt" @@ -0,0 +1,4233 @@ + + + + +Produced by Al Haines + + + + + + + + + +THE CHURCH + +HER BOOKS AND HER SACRAMENTS + + + + +BY + +E. E. HOLMES, B.D. + +ARCHDEACON OF LONDON + + + + +A COURSE OF INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN AT ALL SAINTS + +MARGARET STREET, IN LENT, 1910 + + + + +_NEW IMPRESSION_ + + + + +LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO. + +39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON + +FOURTH AVENUE & 30TH STREET, NEW YORK + +BOMBAY, CALCUTTA, AND MADRAS + +1914 + + + + +BY THE SAME AUTHOR. + +IN WATCHINGS OFTEN: Addresses to Nurses and Others. With a Preface by +the Right Rev. EDWARD KING, D.D., late Bishop of Lincoln. With a +Frontispiece (the Crucifixion, by PERUGINO). Crown 8vo, paper boards, +2s. 6d.; cloth, 3s. 6d. + +PRAYER AND ACTION; or, The Three Notable Duties (Prayer, Fasting, and +Almsgiving). With an Introduction by the Bishop of London. Crown 8vo, +2s. 6d. net. + +IMMORTALITY. Crown 8vo, 4s. net. (_Oxford Library of Practical +Theology_.) + +PARADISE: A Course of Addresses on the State of the Faithful Departed. +Crown 8vo, paper covers, 1s. net; cloth, 2s. net. *** _Extracted from +"Immortality"_ + +RESPONSIBILITY: An Address to Girls. 16mo, paper covers, 4d. net; +bound in rexine, 1s. net. Cheap Edition, 1d. net. + + +LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO., + +LONDON, NEW YORK, BOMBAY, CALCUTTA, AND MADRAS + + + + +TO + +H. F. B. M. + + + + +{vii} + +INTRODUCTION + +These Lectures were originally delivered as the Boyle Lectures for +1910, and were afterwards repeated in a more popular form at All +Saints, Margaret Street. They are now written from notes taken at +their delivery at All Saints, and the writer's thanks are due to the +kindness of those who lent him the notes. Some explanation of their +elementary character seems called for. The Lecturer's object was +twofold:-- + +(1) To remind an instructed congregation of that which they knew +already--and to make them more grateful for the often underrated +privilege of being members of the Catholic Church; and + +(2) To suggest some simple lines of instruction which they might pass +on to others. Unless the instructed Laity will help the Clergy to +teach their uninstructed brethren, a vast number of {viii} Church +people must remain in ignorance of their privileges and +responsibilities. And if at times the instructed get impatient and +say, "Everybody knows that," they will probably be mistaken. Many a +Churchman is ignorant of the first principles of his religion, of why +he is a Churchman, and even of what he means by "the Church," just +because of the false assumption--"Everybody knows". Everybody does not +know. + +It seems absurd to treat such subjects as _The Church, Her Books, Her +Sacraments_, in half-hour Lectures; but, in spite of obvious drawbacks, +there may be two advantages. It may be useful to take a bird's-eye +view of a whole subject rather than to look minutely into each +part--and it may help to keep the Lecturer to the point! + +E. E. H. + + + + +{ix} + +CONTENTS + +CHAP. PAGE + + Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii + I. The Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 + II. The Church's Books (1) The Bible . . . . . . . . 21 + III. " " (2) The Prayer Book . . . . . 40 + IV. The Church's Sacraments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 + V. Baptism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 + VI. The Blessed Sacrament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 + VII. The Lesser Sacraments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 + VIII. Confirmation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 + IX. Holy Matrimony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 + X. Holy Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 + XI. Penance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 + XII. Unction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 + Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 + + + + + Dear Saviour! make our hearts to burn, + And make our lives to shine, + Oh! make us ever true to Thee, + And true to all that's Thine-- + Thy Church, Thy Saints, Thy Sacraments, + Thy Scriptures; may we own + No other Lord, no other rule, + But Thee, and Thine alone. + + A. G. + + + + +{1} + +THE CHURCH. + + +CHAPTER I. + +THE CHURCH ON EARTH. + +_Christus Dilexit Ecclesiam_: "Christ loved the Church"[1]--and if we +love what Christ loved, we do well. + +But three questions meet us:-- + +(1) What is this Church which Christ loved? + +(2) When and where was it established? + +(3) What was it established for? + +First: _What is the Church?_ The Church is a visible Society under a +visible Head, in Heaven, in Paradise, and on Earth. Who is this +visible Head? Jesus Christ--visible to the greatest number of its +members (i.e. in Heaven and in Paradise), and vicariously represented +here by "the Vicar of Christ upon Earth," the Universal Episcopate. + +{2} + +Next: _When and where was it established?_ It was established in +Palestine, in the Upper Chamber, on the first Whitsunday, "the Day of +Pentecost". + +Then: _What was it established for?_ It was established to be the +channel of salvation and sanctification for fallen man. God may, and +does, use other channels, but, "according to the Scriptures," the +Church is the authorized channel. + +As such, let us think of the Church on earth under six Prayer-Book +names:-- + + (I) The Catholic Church. + (II) The National Church. + (III) The Established Church. + (IV) The Church of England. + (V) The Reformed Church. + (VI) The Primitive Church. + + + +(I) THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. + +The Creeds call it "the _Catholic_ Church" and describe its doctrine as +"the _Catholic_ Religion," or the "_Catholic_ Faith". The Te Deum, +Litany, and Ember Collect explain this word "Catholic" to mean "the +holy Church _throughout all the {3} world_," "_an universal_ Church," +"_thy holy_ Church universal"; and the Collect for the King in the +Liturgy defines it as "the _whole_ Church". The "Catholic Church," +then, is "the whole Church," East and West, Latin, Greek, and English, +"throughout all the world ".[2] Its message is world-wide, according +to the terms of its original Commission, "Go ye into _all the world_". + +Thus, wherever there are souls and bodies to be saved and sanctified, +there, sooner or later, will be the Catholic Church. And, as a matter +of history, this is just what we find. Are there souls to be saved and +sanctified in Italy?--there is the Church, with its local headquarters +at Rome. Are there souls to be saved and sanctified in Russia?--there +is the Church, once with its local {4} headquarters at Moscow. Are +there souls to be saved and sanctified in England?--there is the +Church, with its local headquarters at Canterbury. It is, and ever has +been, one and the same Church, "all one man's sons," and that man, the +Man Christ Jesus. The Catholic Church is like the ocean. There is the +Atlantic Ocean, the Indian Ocean, the Pacific Ocean: and yet there are +not three oceans, but one ocean. The Atlantic Ocean is not the Indian +Ocean, nor is the Indian Ocean the Pacific Ocean: they are all together +the one universal ocean--"the ocean". + +But, after all, is not this a somewhat vague and nebulous conception of +"The Church". If it is to go into all the world, how, from a business +point of view, is this world-wide mission, in all its grandeur, to be +accomplished? The answer is seen in our second name:-- + + + +(II) THE NATIONAL CHURCH. + +For business and administrative purposes, the world is divided into +different nations. For business and practical purposes, the Church +follows the same method. The Catholic Church is the channel of "saving +health to all nations". As at Pentecost the Church, typically, reached +"every {5} nation under heaven," so, age after age, must every nation +receive the Church's message. The Universal Church must be planted in +each nation--not to denationalize that nation; not to plant another +National Church in the nation; but to establish itself as "the Catholic +Church" in that particular area, and to gather out of it some national +feature of universal life to present to the Universal Head. Thus, a +National Church is the local presentment of the Catholic Church in the +nation. As Dr. Newman puts it: "The Holy Church throughout all the +world is manifest and acts through what is called _in each country_, +the Church Visible". + +As such, the duty of a National Church is two-fold. It must teach the +nation; it must feed the nation. First: it is the function of the +National Church to teach the nation. What is its subject? Religion. +It is to teach the nation religion--not to be taught religion by the +nation. It is no more the State's function to teach religion to the +authorities of the National Church[3] than it is the {6} function of +the nation to teach art to the authorities of the National Gallery. +Nor, again, is it the function of a National Church to teach the nation +a _national_ religion; it is the office of the Church to teach the +nation the _Catholic_ religion--to say, in common with the rest of +Christendom, "the Catholic religion is this," and none other. Thus, +the faith of a National Church is not the changing faith of a passing +majority; it is the unchanging faith of a permanent Body, the Catholic +Church. Different ages may explain the faith in different ways; +different nations may present it by different methods; different minds +may interpret it in different lights; but it is one and the same faith, +"throughout all the world ". + +A second function of the National Church is to feed the nation--to feed +it with something which no State has to offer. It is the hand of the +Catholic Church dispensing to the nation "something better than bread". +When a priest is ordained, the Bishop bids him be "a faithful dispenser +of the Word of God, and of His holy Sacraments," and then gives him a +local sphere of action "in the congregation where thou shalt be +lawfully appointed thereunto".[4] Ideally, this {7} is carried out by +the parochial system. For administrative purposes, the National Church +is divided into parishes, and thus brings the Scriptures and Sacraments +to every individual in every nation in which the Catholic Church is +established. It is a grand and business-like conception. First, the +Church's _mission_, "Go ye into all the world"; then the Church's +_method_--planting itself in nation after nation "throughout all the +world"; dividing (still for administrative purposes) each nation into +provinces; each province into dioceses; each diocese into +archdeaconries; each archdeaconry into rural deaneries; each rural +deanery into parishes; and so teaching and feeding each unit in each +parish, by the hand of the National Church. + +All this is, or should be, going on in England, and we have now to ask +when and by whom the Catholic Church, established in the Upper Chamber +on the Day of Pentecost, was established in our country. + + + +(III) THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH. + +The Catholic Church was established, or re-established,[5] in this +realm in the year {8} 597.[6] It was established by St. Augustine, +afterwards the first Archbishop of Canterbury. How do we know this? +By documentary evidence. This is the only evidence which, in such a +case, is final. If it is asked when, and by whom, our great public +schools were established, the answer can be proved or disproved by +documents. If, for instance, it is asked when, and by whom, +_Winchester_ was established, documents, and documents only, {9} can +answer the question---and documents definitely reply: in 1387, by +William of Wykeham; if it is asked when, and by whom, _Eton_ was +established, documents answer: in 1441, by Henry VI; if it is asked +when, and by whom, _Harrow_ was established, documents respond: in +1571, by John Lyon; if it is asked when, and by whom, _Charterhouse_ +was established, documents again reply: in 1611, by Sir Thomas Sutton. +It can all be proved by, and only by, documentary evidence. So with +the sects. Documents can prove that the Congregationalists established +themselves in England in 1568, under Robert Brown; Quakers in 1660, +under George Fox; Unitarians in 1719, under Samuel Clarke; Wesleyans in +1799, under a Wesleyan Conference. Records exist proving that these +various sects were established at these given dates, and no records +exist proving that they were established at any other dates. So with +the Church. Records exist proving that it was established by +Augustine, in England, in 597, and no records exist even hinting that +it was established at any other time by anybody else. + + + +{10} + +"_As by Law Established._"[7] + +A not unnatural mistake has sometimes arisen from the phrase "_as by +law_ established". Where is this law? It does not exist. No law ever +established the Church of England. The expression refers to the +protection given by law to the Catholic Church in England, enabling it +to do its duty in, and to, the country. It tells of the legal +recognition of the Church in the country long before the State existed; +it expresses the legal declaration that the Church of England is not a +mere insular sect, but part of the Universal Church "throughout all the +world". A State can, of course, if it chooses, establish and {11} +endow any religion--Mohammedan, Hindoo, Christian, in a country. It +can establish Presbyterianism or Quakerism or Undenominationalism in +England if it elects so to do; but none of these would be the Church of +Jesus Christ established in the Upper Chamber on the Day of Pentecost. +As a matter of history, no Church was ever established or endowed by +State law in England.[8] If such a tremendous Act as the establishment +of the Church of England by law had been passed, it is obvious that +some document would attest it, as it does in the case of the +establishment of the Scotch Presbyterian Church in the reign of William +III. No such document exists. But an authentic {12} record does exist +proving the establishment of the Pentecostal Church in England in 597. +It is this old Pentecostal Church that we speak of as the Church of +England. + + + +(IV) THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. + +Who gave it this name? The Pope.[9] It was given by Pope Gregory in a +letter to Augustine. In this letter[10] Gregory speaks of three +Churches--the {13} Church of Rome, the Church of Gaul, and the _Church +of the English_, and he bids Augustine compile a Liturgy from the +different Churches for the "Use" of the Church of England. + +We see, then, that the Church of England is the Catholic Church in +England. As the Church of Ephesus is the Catholic Church in Ephesus, +or the Church of Laodicea is the Catholic Church in Laodicea, or the +Church of Thyatira the Catholic Church in Thyatira, so the Church of +England is the Catholic Church in England. Just as St. Clement begins +his Epistle to the Corinthians with, "The _Church of God_, which is at +Rome, to the _Church of God_ which is at Corinth," so might Archbishop +Davidson write to the Italians, "_The Church of God_, which is at +Canterbury, to the _Church of God_, which is at Rome". It is in each +case, "the Church of God," "made visible," in the nation where it is +planted. + +{14} + +But, being national (being, for example, in England), it is, obviously, +subject to the dangers, as well as the privileges, of national +character, national temperament--and, in our case, national insularity. +The national presentment of the Catholic Church may err, and may err +without losing its Catholicity. The Church of England, "as also the +Church of Rome, hath erred";[11] it has needed, it needs, it will need, +reforming. Hence we come to our fifth name:-- + + + +(V) THE REFORMED CHURCH. + +The name is very suggestive. It suggests two things--life and +continuity. + +First, _life_. A reforming Church is a living Church. Reformation is +a sign of animation, for a dead organism cannot reform itself. Then, +_continuity_. The reformed man, must be the same man, or he would not +be a reformed man but somebody else. So with the Church of England. +It would have been quite possible, however ludicrous, to have +established a new Church in the sixteenth century, but that would not +have been a reformed Church, it would have been {15} another +Church--the very last thing the Reformers contemplated. + +A Reformed Church, then, is not the formation of a new Church, but the +re-formation of the old Church. + +How did the old Church of England reform itself? Roughly speaking, the +English Reformation did two things. It affirmed something, and it +denied something. + +First, it affirmed something. For instance, the Church of England +affirmed that the Church in this country in the sixteenth century was +one with the Church of the sixth century. It affirmed that it was the +very same Church that had been established in Palestine on the Day of +Pentecost, and in this realm by Augustine in 597. It reaffirmed its +old national independence in things local just as it had affirmed it in +the days of Pope Gregory, It re-affirmed its adherence to every +doctrine[12] held by the undivided Church, without adding thereto, or +taking therefrom. + +{16} + +Then, it denied something. It denied the right of foreigners to +interfere in purely English affairs; it denied the right of the Bishop +of one National Church to exercise his power in another National +Church; it denied the claim of the Bishop of Rome to exercise +jurisdiction over the Archbishop of Canterbury; it denied the power of +any one part of the Church to impose local decisions, or local dogmas, +upon any other part of the Church. + +Thus, the Reformation both affirmed and denied. It affirmed the +constitutional rights of the Church as against the unconstitutional +claims of the Pope, and it denied the unconstitutional claims of the +State as against the constitutional rights of the Church. + +Much more, very much more, "for weal or for woe," it did. It had to +buy its experience. The Reformation was not born grown up. It made +its mistakes, as every growing movement will do. It is still growing, +still making mistakes, still purging and pruning itself as it grows; +and it is still asserting its right to reform itself where it {17} has +gone wrong, and to return to the old ideal where it has departed from +it. And this old ideal is wrapped up in the sixth name:-- + + + +(VI) THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. + +Re-formation must be based upon its original formation if it would aim +at real reform. It is not necessarily a mechanical imitation of the +past, but a genuine portrait of the permanent. It is, then, to the +Primitive Church that we must look for the principles of reformation. +If the meaning of a will is contested years after the testator's death, +reference will be made, as far as possible, to the testator's +contemporaries, or to writings which might best interpret his +intentions. This is what the English Reformers of the sixteenth +century tell us that they did. They refer perpetually to the past; +over and over again they send us to the "ancient fathers,"[13] as to +those living and writing nearest to the days when the Church was +established, and as most likely to know her mind. They go back to what +the "Commination Service" calls "The Primitive Church". This +"Primitive Church" is the Reformed Church now established in England. +{18} The Reformers themselves never meant it to be anything else, and +would have been the first to protest against the unhistoric, low, and +modern use of the word "established". In this sense, they would have +been the sturdiest of sturdy "Protestants". + +And this word Protestant reminds us that there is one more name +frequently given to the Church of England, but not included in our +scheme, because found nowhere in the Prayer Book. + + + +THE PROTESTANT CHURCH. + +The term is a foreign one--not English. It comes from Germany and was +given to the Lutherans in 1529, because they protested against an +edict[14] forbidding them to regulate their own local ecclesiastical +affairs, pending the decision of a General Council. + +It had nothing whatever to do with "protesting" against ceremonial. +The ceremonial of the Church in Lutheran Germany is at least as +carefully elaborated as that seen in the majority of English churches. + +Later on, the term was borrowed from the Germans by the English, and +applied to {19} Churchmen who protested (1) against doctrines held +_exclusively_ by Rome on the one hand, and by Lutherans and Calvinists +on the other; and (2) against claims made by the King over the rights +and properties of the Church. Later still, it has been applied to +those who protest against the ancient interpretation of Prayer-Book +teaching on the Sacraments and Ceremonial. + +There is, it is true, a sense in which the name is fairly used to +represent the views of all loyal English Churchmen. Every English +Churchman protests against anything unhistoric or uncatholic. The +Church of England does protest against anything imposed by one part of +the Church on any other part of the Church, apart from the consent of +the whole Church. It does protest against the claims of Italy or of +any other nation to rule England, or to impose upon us, as _de fide_, +anything exclusively Roman. In this sense, Laud declared upon the +scaffold that he died "a true Protestant"; in this sense, Nicholas +Ferrar, founder of a Religious House in Huntingdonshire, called himself +a Protestant; in this sense, we are all Protestants, and in this sense +we are not ashamed of our unhistoric name. + +{20} + +In these Prayer-Book names, then, we see (1) that the Church on earth +is a society, established in the Upper Chamber on the Day of Pentecost; +(2) that it was established to be the ordained and ordinary channel +through which God saves and sanctifies fallen man; (3) that, in order +to accomplish this, and for business and administrative purposes, the +Church Catholic establishes itself in national centres; (4) that one +such national centre is England; and (5) that this Pentecostal Church +established in England is the Church which "Christ loved," the Sponsa +Christi, the "Bride of Christ":-- + + _Elect from every nation,_ + _Yet one all o'er the Earth._ + + + +[1] Eph. v. 25. + +[2] The primary meaning of the word Catholic seems to refer to +world-wide extension. St. Augustine teaches that it means "Universal" +as opposed to particular, and says that "The Church is called Catholic +because it is spread throughout the whole world". St. Cyril of +Jerusalem says: "The Church is called Catholic because it extends +throughout the whole world, from one end of the Earth to the other," +and he adds, "because it teaches universally all the doctrines which +men ought to know" ("Catechetical Lectures," xviii. 23). + +[3] "Foul fall the day," writes Mr. Gladstone, "when the persons of +this world shall, on whatever pretext, take into their uncommissioned +hands the manipulation of the religion of our Lord and Saviour." + +[4] Service for "The Ordering of Priests". + +[5] There was, of course, an ancient British Church long before the +sixth century, and there is evidence that it existed in the middle of +the second century. It sent bishops to the Council of Arles in 314, +and there is a church at Canterbury in which Queen Bertha's chaplain +celebrated some twenty-five years before the coming of Augustine. But +its origin is shrouded in mystery, and it had been practically +extinguished by Jutes, Saxons, and Angles before Augustine arrived. +"Of the ancient British Church," writes Bishop Stubbs, in an +unpublished letter, "we must be content to admit that history tells us +next to nothing, and that what glimmerings of truth we think we can +discover in legend grow fainter and fainter the more closely they are +examined. Authentic records there are none." Some ascribe the first +preaching of the Gospel in Britain to St. Peter, others to St. Paul, or +St. James, or St. Simon Zelotes, and the monks of Glastonbury ascribe +it to their founder, Joseph of Arimathea, who was, they say, sent to +Britain by St. Philip with eleven others in A.D. 63. Cf. letter of Dr. +Bright to "The Guardian," 14 March, 1888, and see "Letters and Memoirs +of William Bright," pp. 267 _seq_. + +[6] i.e. the English, as distinct from the British Church. + +[7] "The word Establishment," writes Bishop Stubbs, "means, of course, +the national recognition of our Church as a Christian Church, as the +representment of the religious life of the nation as historically +worked out and by means of property and discipline enabled to +discharge, so far as outward discharge can insure it, the effectual +performance of the duties that membership of a Christian Church +involves. It means the national recognition of a system by which every +inch of land in England, and every living soul in the population is +assigned to a ministration of help, teaching, advice, and comfort of +religion, a system in which every English man woman and child has a +right to the service of a clergyman and to a home of spiritual life in +the service of the Church" ("Visitation Charges," p. 303). + +[8] A State can, of course, _endow_, as well as establish, any form of +religion it selects. It has a perfect right to do so. But the State +has never endowed the Church of England, and it can only disendow it in +the sense that it can rob it of its own endowments--just as it can, by +Act of Parliament, rob any business man of his money. It has done this +once already. At the Great Rebellion, the Church of England was, in +this sense, disestablished and disendowed. By the Act of Uniformity of +Charles II, it was reinstated into the rights and liberties from which +it had been deposed. But it remained the same Church which Augustine +established in England all the time. Its reinstatement no more made +the Church a new Church, than the restoration of Charles II made the +monarchy a new monarchy. + +[9] It is sometimes asked, Does not the presence of the Bishops in the +House of Lords constitute an Established Church? No. Representatives +from all the sects might, and some probably will, sit there without +either making their sect the established Church of the country, or +unmaking the Catholic Church the Church of the country. Bishops have +sat in the House of Lords ever since there has been a House of Lords to +sit in, but neither their exclusion, nor the inclusion of non-Bishops, +would disestablish the Church of England. + +It is also asked, do not the Prime Ministers make the Bishops? Prime +Ministers, as we shall see, do not _make_ but _nominate_ the Bishops. + +[10] Augustine is worried, as we are worried, by the variety of customs +in different Churches, and asks Pope Gregory "why one custom of masses +is observed in the Holy Roman Church and another in the Church of the +Gallic Provinces". "My brother knows," replied Gregory, "the custom of +the Roman Church in which he was brought up. But my pleasure is that +you should, with great care, select whatever you think will best please +Almighty God wherever you find it, whether in the Church of Rome, or in +the Church of Gaul, or in any other Church, and then plant firmly in +the Church of the English that which you have selected from many +Churches.... Choose, then, from each individual Church things pious, +religious, righteous, and having, as it were, collected them into a +volume, deposit them with the minds of the English as their custom, +their Use." + +[11] Art. XIX. + +[12] "I protest," wrote Archbishop Cranmer, "and openly confess that, +in all my doctrine, whatsoever it be, not only I mean and judge those +things as the Catholic Church, and the most holy Fathers of old, with +one accord, have meant and judged, but also I would gladly use the same +words which they used, and not use any other words, but to set my hand +to all and singular their speeches, phrases, ways, and forms of speech, +which they did use in their treatise upon the Sacraments, and to keep +still their interpretation." + +[13] See Preface to the Prayer Book. + +[14] The Edict of the Diet (or Council) of Spires. + + + + +{21} + +CHAPTER II. + +THE CHURCH'S BOOKS. + +For the purpose of these lectures, we will select two:-- + +(1) _The Bible_, the possession of the whole Church. + +(2) _The Prayer Book_, the possession of the Church of England. + + + +(1) THE BIBLE. + +And notice: _first, the Church; then, the Bible_--first the Society, +then its Publications; first the Writers; then the Writings; first the +Messenger, then the Message; first the Agent, then the Agencies. + +This is the Divine Order. Preaching, not writing, was the Apostolic +method. Oral teaching preceded the written word. Then, later on, lest +this oral teaching should be lost, forgotten, or misquoted, it was +gradually committed to {22} manuscript, and its "good tidings" +published in writing for the Church's children. + +It is very important to remember this order ("first the Church, and +then the Bible"), because thousands of souls lived and died long before +the New Testament was written. The earliest books of the New Testament +(the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians) were not written +for twenty years after the Day of Pentecost; the earliest Gospel (St. +Mark) was not committed to writing before A.D. 65. And, even if the +Bible had been written earlier, few could have read it; and even then +few could have possessed it. It was a rare book, wholly out of reach +of "the people". The first Bible was not printed until 1445. + +But, thank God, the Church, which wrote the book, could teach without +the book; and we may be sure that no single soul was lost for the want +of what it could not possess. "Without a Bible," says St. Irenaeus, +writing in the second century, "they received, from the Church, +teaching sufficient for the salvation of their souls." + +Then, again, the Church alone could decide which books were, and which +books were not, "the Scriptures". How else could we know? The society +authorizes its publications. It affixes {23} its seal only to the +books it has issued. So with the Divine Society, the Church. It +affixes its seal to the books we now know as the Bible. How do we +know, for instance, that St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians are +part of the Bible, and that St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians is +not part of the Bible? Because, and only because, the Church has so +decided. If we had lived in the days of persecution it would have made +a considerable difference to us whether this or that sacred book was +included in the Christian Scriptures. Thus, when the early Christians +were ordered by Diocletian to "bring out their books," and either burn +them or die for them, it became a matter of vital importance to know +which these books were. Who could tell them this? Only the society +which published them, only the Church. + +Again, the Church, and only the Church, is the final _interpreter_ of +the Bible--it is the "_witness_ and keeper of holy writ".[1] The +society which publishes a statement must be the final interpreter of +that statement. Probably no book ever published needed authoritative +interpretation more than the Bible. We call it "the book of {24} +peace"; it is in reality a book of war. No book has spread more +discord than the Bible. Every sect in the world quotes the Bible as +the source and justification of its existence. Men, equally learned, +devout, prayerful, deduce the most opposite conclusions from the very +same words. Two men, we will say, honestly and earnestly seek to know +what the Bible teaches about Baptismal Regeneration, or the Blessed +Sacrament. They have exactly the same _data_ to go upon, precisely the +same statements before them; yet, from the same premises, they will +deduce a diametrically opposite conclusion. Hence, party wrangling, +and sectarian bitterness; hence, the confusion of tongues, which has +changed our Zion into Babel. Indeed, as we all know, so sharp was the +contention in the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries, that translations +of the Bible were actually forbidden by two local Church Councils.[2] + +An interpreter is as much needed now, as in the days of the Ethiopian +Eunuch. "_How_ readest thou?"[3] is a question second only in {25} +importance (if, indeed, it is second) to "_What_ is written?" Upon +"how" we read, will very largely depend the value of "what" we read. +We go, then, to the Church to interpret the book which it gave us. + +And notice--to say this, is not to disparage the Scriptures because we +exalt the Church. It is to put both Church and Scriptures in their +true, historical place. We do not disparage a publication because we +exalt the society which issues that publication; rather, we honour the +one by exalting the other. Thus, when we say that the creeds interpret +the Bible, we do not disparage the Bible because we exalt the creeds, +any more than we disparage the Church when we say that the Bible proves +the creeds. Take the "Virgin Birth," as a single illustration. Are we +to believe that our Blessed Lord was "born of the Virgin Mary"? Church +and Bible give the same reply. The Church taught it before the Bible +recorded it; the Bible recorded it because the Church taught it. For +us, as Churchmen, the matter is settled once and for all by the +Apostles' Creed. Here we have the official and authoritative teaching +of the Catholic Church, as proved by the New Testament; "born of the +Virgin Mary". + +{26} + +It is this Bible, the Church's Manual of doctrine and devotion, that we +are to think of. + +We will think of it under five familiar names:-- + + (I) The Scriptures. + (II) The Bible. + (III) The Word of God. + (IV) Inspiration. + (V) Revelation. + + + +(I) THE SCRIPTURES. + +This was the earliest name by which the Bible was known--the name by +which it was called for the first 1200 years in Church history. It was +so named by the Latin Fathers in the fifth century, and it means, of +course, "The Writings". These "Scriptures," or "Writings," were not, +as the plural form of the word reminds us, one book, but many books, +afterwards gathered into one book.[4] They were a library of separate +books, called by St. Irenaeus "The Divine Library"--perhaps {27} the +best and most descriptive name the Bible ever had. This library +consists of sixty-six books, not all written at one period, or for one +age, but extending over a period of, at least, 1200 years. + +The original copies of these writings, or Scriptures, have not yet been +discovered, though we have extant three very early copies of them, +written "by hand". These are known as the _Alexandrine_ manuscript (or +Codex), the _Vatican_ manuscript, and the _Sinaitic_ manuscript. Where +may they be found? + +One, dating from the latter part of the fourth, or the early part of +the fifth century, is in the British Museum--a priceless treasure, +which comparatively few have taken the trouble to go and see. It is +known as the _Alexandrine_ manuscript, and was presented to Charles I +by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1628. It consists of four +volumes, three of which contain nearly all the Old Testament, and parts +of the Apocrypha, and a fourth, containing a large part of the New +Testament. + +A second manuscript, dating from the fourth century, is in the Vatican +Library in Rome, and is, therefore, known as the _Vatican_ manuscript. +{28} It contains nearly the whole of both the Old and New Testaments, +and of the Apocrypha. + +The third manuscript, dating also from the fourth century, is in the +Imperial Library at St. Petersburg. It was discovered by Prof. +Tischendorf, in 1859, in a basket of fragments, destined to be burned, +in the Monastery of St. Catherine on _Mount Sinai_; hence it is called +the _Sinaitic_ manuscript. + +These are the three earliest MS. collections of the Bible as yet +discovered--and strange stories, of mystic beauty, and, it may be, of +weird persecution, they could tell if only they could speak. Other +manuscripts we have--copies of ancient manuscripts; versions of ancient +manuscripts; translations of ancient manuscripts; texts of ancient +manuscripts. So they come down the ages, till, at last, we reach our +own "Revised Version," probably the most accurate and trustworthy +version in existence. + +"The Scriptures," or "the Writings," then, consist of many books, and +in this very fact, they tell their own tale--the tale of diversity in +unity. They were written for divers ages, divers intellects, divers +nations, in divers languages, by divers authors or compilers. They +were not all {29} written for the twentieth century, though they all +have a message for the twentieth century; they were not all written for +the English people, though they all have a truth for the English +people; they were not all written by the same hand, though the same +Hand guided all the writers. In, and through the Scriptures, "God, at +sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the +fathers by the prophets"; and in, and through them, He "hath in these +last days, spoken unto us by His Son".[5] + +Time passes, and these sixty-six books, written at different periods, +in different styles, in different dialects, are gathered together in +one book, called "The Book," or The Bible. + + + +(II) THE BIBLE. + +It was so named by the Greek Fathers in the thirteenth century, +hundreds of years after its earliest name, "The Scriptures". The word +is derived from the Greek _Biblia_, books, and originally meant the +Egyptian _papyrus_ (or _paper-reed_) from which paper was first made. +A "bible," then, was originally any book made of paper, and {30} the +name was afterwards given to the "Book of Books"--"_The Bible_". + +Here, then, are sixty-six volumes bound together in one volume. This, +too, tells its own tale. If "The Scriptures," or scattered writings, +speak of diversity in unity, "The Bible," or collected writings, tells +of unity in diversity. Each separate book has its own most sacred +message, while one central, unifying thought dominates all--the +Incarnate Son of God. The Old Testament writings foretell His coming +("They are they which testify of me"[6]); the New Testament writings +proclaim His Advent ("The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us"[7]). +Thus, all the books become one book. + + _Many the tongues,_ + _The theme is one,_ + _The glory of the Eternal Son._ + + +Take away that central Figure, and both the background of the Old +Testament and the foreground of the New become dull, sunless, +colourless. Reinstate that central Figure, and book after book, roll +after roll, volume after volume, becomes bright, sunny, intelligible. + +This it is which separates the Bible from every other book; this it is +which makes it the worthiest {31} of all books for reverent, prayerful +criticism; this it is which makes its words nuggets of gold, "dearer +unto me than thousands of gold and silver"; this it is which gives the +Bible its third name:-- + + + +(III) THE WORD OF GOD. + +In what sense is the Bible the Word of God? Almost any answer must +hurt some, and almost every answer must disappoint others. For a time, +the "old school" and the "new school" must bear with each other, +neither counting itself "to have apprehended," but each pressing +forward to attain results. + +In speaking of the Bible, we commonly meet with two extreme classes: on +the one hand, there are those who hold that every syllable is the Word +of God, and therefore outside all criticism; on the other hand, there +are those who hold that the Bible is no more the "Word of God" than any +other book, and may, therefore, be handled and criticized just like any +other book. In between these two extremes, there is another class, +which holds that the Bible is the Word of God, and that just because it +is the Word of God, it is--above all other books--an "open Bible," a +{32} book open for sacred study, devout debate, reverent criticism. + +The first class holds that every one of the 925,877 words in the Bible +is as literally "God's Word" as if no human hand had written it. Thus, +Dean Burgon writes: "Every word of it, every chapter of it, every +syllable of it, every letter of it, is the direct utterance of the Most +High.... Every syllable is just what it would have been ... _without +the intervention of any human agent_." This, of course, creates +hopeless difficulties. For instance, in the Authorized Version (to +take but one single version) there are obvious insertions, such as St. +Mark xvi. 9-20, which may not be "the Word of God" at all. There are +obvious misquotations, such as in the seven variations in St. Stephen's +speech.[8] There are obvious doubts about accurate translations, where +the marginal notes give alternative readings. There are obvious +mistakes by modern printers, as there were by ancient copyists.[9] +There are three versions of the Psalms now in use (the Authorized +Version, the Revised Version, and the Prayer-Book Version), all +differing {33} from each other. The translators of the Authorized +Version wish, they say, to make "_one more exact_ translation of the +Scriptures," and one-third of the translators of the Revised Version +constantly differs from the other two-thirds. Here, clearly, the human +agent is at work. + +Then there are those who, perhaps from a natural reaction, deny that +any word in the Bible is in any special sense "the Word of God". But +this, too, creates hopeless difficulties, and satisfies no serious +student. If the Bible is, in no special sense, the Word of God, there +is absolutely no satisfactory explanation of its unique position and +career in history. It is a great fact which remains unaccounted for. +Moreover, no evidence exists which suggests that the writers who call +it the Word of God were either frauds or dupes, or that they were +deceived when they proclaimed "_God_ spake these words, and said"; or, +"Thus saith _the Lord_"; or, "The Revelation of _Jesus Christ_ by His +servant John". There must, upon the lowest ground, be a sense in which +it may be truly said that the Bible is the Word of God as no other book +is. This we may consider under the fourth name, Inspiration. + + + +{34} + +(IV) INSPIRATION. + +What do we mean by the word? The Church has nowhere defined it, and we +are not tied to any one interpretation; but the Bible itself suggests a +possible meaning. + +It is the Word of God heard through the voice of man. + +Think of some such expression as: "_The Revelation of Jesus Christ +which God gave by His angel unto His servant John_" (Rev. i. 1). Here +two facts are stated: (1) The revelation is from Jesus Christ; (2) It +was given through a human agent--John. God gave it; man conveyed it. +Again: "_Holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost_" +(2 Pet. i. 21). The Holy Ghost moved them; they spake: the speakers, +not the writings, were inspired. Again: "_As He spake by the mouth of +His holy Prophets_"[10] (St. Luke i. 70). He spake; but He spake +through the mouthpiece of the human agent. And once again, as the +Collect for the second Sunday in Advent tells us, it is the "_blessed +Lord Who (hast) caused all Holy Scriptures to be written_". God was +the initiating {35} cause of writings: man was the inspired writer. +Each messenger received the message, but each passed it on in his own +way. It was with each as it was with Haggai: "Then spake Haggai, the +_Lord's messenger_ in the _Lord's message_" (Haggai i. 13). The +message was Divine, though the messenger was human; the message was +infallible, though the messenger was fallible; the vessel was earthen, +though the contents were golden. In this unique sense, the Bible is +indeed "the Word of God". It is the "Word of God," delivered in the +words of man. + +Thus, as Dr. Sanday puts it, the Bible is, at once, both human and +Divine; not less Divine because thoroughly human, and not less human +because essentially Divine. We need not necessarily parcel it out and +say such and such things are human and such and such things are Divine, +though there are instances in which we may do this, and the Scriptures +would justify us in so doing. There will be much in Holy Scripture +which is at once very human and very Divine. The two aspects are not +incompatible with each other; rather, they are intimately united. Look +at them in one light, and you will see the one; look at them in another +light, and you will see {36} the other. But the substance of that +which gives these different impressions is one and the same. + +It is from no irreverence, but because of the over-towering importance +of the book, that the best scholars (devout, prayerful scholars, as +well as the reverse) have given the best of their lives to the study of +its text, its history, its writers, its contents. + +Their criticism has, as we know, been classified under three heads:-- + + (1) Lower, or _textual_ criticism. + (2) Higher, or _documentary_ criticism. + (3) Historical, or _contemporary_ criticism. + +_Lower criticism_ seeks for, and studies, the best and purest text +obtainable--the text nearest to the original, from which fresh +translations can be made. + +_Higher criticism_ seeks for, and studies, documents: it deals with the +authenticity of different books, the date at which they were written, +the names of their authors. + +_Historical criticism_ seeks for, and studies, _data_ relating to the +history of the times when each book was written, and the light thrown +upon that history by recent discoveries (e.g. in archaeology, and +excavations in Palestine). + +{37} + +No very definite results have yet been reached on many points of +criticism, and, on many of them, scholars have had again and again to +reverse their conclusions. We are still only _en route_, and are +learning more and more to possess our souls in patience, and to wait +awhile for anything in the nature of finality. Meanwhile, the living +substance is unshaken and untouched. + +This living substance, entrusted to living men, is the revelation of +God to man, and leads us to our last selected name--Revelation. + + + +(V) REVELATION. + +The Bible is the revelation of the Blessed Trinity to man--of God the +Son, by God the Father, through God the Holy Ghost. It is the +revelation of God to man, and in man. First, it reveals God _to_ +man--"pleased as Man with man to dwell". In it, God stands in front of +man, and, through the God-Man, shows him what God is like. It reveals +God as the "pattern on the mount," for man to copy on the plain. But +it does more than this: it reveals God _in_ man. So St. Paul writes: +"It pleased God to reveal His Son _in_ me";[11] and again, "God hath +{38} shined _in_ our hearts".[12] The Bible reveals to me that Jesus, +the revelation of the Father, through the Eternal Spirit, dwells in me, +as well as outside me. He is a power within, as well as a pattern +without. + +Yet again. The Bible reveals God's purpose _for_ man. There is no +such other revelation of that purpose. You cannot deduce God's purpose +either in man's life, or in his twentieth century environment. It can +only be fully deduced from Revelation. Man may seem temporarily to +defeat God's purpose, to postpone its accomplishment; but Revelation +(and nothing but Revelation) proclaims that "the Word of the Lord +standeth sure," and that God's primal purpose is God's final purpose. + +Lastly, the Bible is the revelation of a future state. Things begun +here will be completed there. As such, it gives man a hope on which to +build a belief, and a belief on which to found a hope. + + We must believe, + For still we hope + That, in a world of larger scope, + What here is faithfully begun + Will be completed, not undone. + +{39} + +Thus, we may, perhaps, find in these five familiar names, brief +headings for leisure thoughts. In them, we see the _Scriptures_, or +many books, gathered together into one book called _The Book_. In this +book, we see the _Word of God_ delivered to men by men, and these men +_inspired_ by God to be the living _media_ of the _Revelation_ of God +to man. + +Our next selected book will be the Church of England Prayer Book. + + + +[1] Art. XX. + +[2] The Council of Toulouse, 1229, and the Council of Trent, 1545-63. + +[3] St. Luke x. 26, + +[4] The first division of the Bible into _chapters_ is attributed +either to Cardinal Hugo, for convenience in compiling his Concordance +of the Vulgate (about 1240), or to Stephen Langton, Archbishop of +Canterbury (about 1228), to facilitate quotation. _Verses_ were +introduced into the New Testament by Robert Stephens, 1551. It is said +that he did the work on a journey from Paris to Lyons. + +[5] Heb. i. 1, 2. + +[6] St. John v. 39. + +[7] St. John i. 14. + +[8] Acts VII. + +[9] The University Presses offer L1 1s. for every such hitherto +undiscovered inaccuracy brought to their notice. + +[10] This is the Church's description of Inspiration in the Nicene +Creed: "Who spake by the Prophets". + +[11] Gal. i. 15, 16. + +[12] 2 Cor. iv. 6. + + + + +{40} + +CHAPTER III. + +THE CHURCH'S BOOKS. + +(2) THE PRAYER BOOK. + +We now come to the second of the Church's books selected for +discussion--the Prayer Book. + +The English Prayer Book is the local presentment of the Church's +Liturgies for the English people. + +Each part of the Church has its own Liturgy, differing in detail, +language, form; but all teaching the same faith, all based upon the +same rule laid down by Gregory for Augustine's guidance.[1] Thus, +there is the Liturgy of St. James, the Liturgy of St. John,[2] the +Liturgy of St. Mark, and others. A National Church is within her +rights when she compiles a Liturgy for National Use, provided that it +is in harmony with the basic Liturgies of the Undivided Church. She +has {41} as much right to her local "Use," with its rules and ritual, +as a local post office has to its own local regulations, provided it +does not infringe any universal rule of the General Post Office. For +example, a National Church has a perfect right to say in what language +her Liturgy shall be used. When the English Prayer Book orders her +Liturgy to be said in "the vulgar,"[3] or common, "tongue" of the +people, she is not infringing, but exercising a local right which +belongs to her as part of the Church Universal. This is what the +English Church has done in the English Prayer Book. + +It is this Prayer Book that we are now to consider. + +We will try to review, or get a bird's-eye view of it as a whole, +rather than attempt to go into detail. And, as the best reviewer is +the one who lets a book tell its own story, and reads the author's +meaning out of it rather than his own theories into it, we will let the +book, as far as possible, speak for itself. + +Now, in reviewing a book, the reviewer will probably look at three +things: the title, the preface, the contents. + + + +{42} + +(I) THE TITLE. + +"_The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and +other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the Use of the +Church of England._" + +Here are three clear statements: (1) it is "The Book of Common Prayer +"; (2) it is the local "directory" for the "_Administration_ of the +Sacraments of the Church," i.e. of the Universal Church; (3) this +directory is called the "Use of the Church of England". Think of each +statement in turn. + +(1) _It is "The Book of Common Prayer"_.--"Common Prayer"[4] was the +name given to public worship in the middle of the sixteenth century. +The Book of Common Prayer is the volume in which the various services +were gathered together for common use. It is many books in one book. +As the Bible is one book made up of sixty-six books, so the Prayer Book +is one book made up of six books. These books, revised and abbreviated +for English "Use," were:-- + +{43} + + (1) The Pontifical. + (2) The Missal. + (3) The Gospels. + (4) The Gradual. + (5) The Breviary. + (6) The Manual. + + +Before the invention of printing, these books were written in +manuscript, and were too heavy to carry about bound together in one +volume. Each, therefore, was carried by the user separately. Thus, +when the Bishop, or _Pontifex_, was ordaining or confirming, he carried +with him a separate book containing the offices for Ordination and +Confirmation; and, because it contained the offices used by the Bishop, +or _Pontiff_, it was called the _Pontifical_. When a priest wished to +celebrate the Holy Eucharist, he used a separate book called "The +Missal" (from the Latin _Missa_, a Mass[5]). When, in the Eucharist, +the deacon read the Gospel for the day, he read it from a separate book +called "The Gospels". When he {44} went in procession to read it, the +choir sang scriptural phrases out of a separate book called "The +Gradual" (from the Latin _gradus_, a step), because they were sung in +_gradibus_, i.e. upon the steps of the pulpit, or rood-loft, from which +the Gospel was read. When the clergy said their offices at certain +fixed "Hours," they used a separate book called "The Breviary" (from +the Latin _brevis_, short), because it contained the brief, or short, +writings which constituted the office, out of which our English Matins +and Evensong were practically formed. When services for such as needed +Baptism, Matrimony, Unction, Burial, were required, some light book +that could easily be carried _in the hand_ was used, and this was +called "The Manual" (from the Latin _manus_, a hand). + +These six books, written in Latin, were, in 1549, shortened, and, with +various alterations, translated into English, bound in one volume, +which is called "The Book of Common Prayer". + +Alterations, some good and some bad, have from time to time been +adopted, and revisions made; but the Prayer Book is now the same in +substance as it always has been--a faithful reproduction, in all +essentials, of the worship and {45} teaching of the Undivided Church. +As we all know, a further revision is now contemplated. All agree that +it is needed; all would like to amend the Prayer Book in one direction +or another; but there is a sharp contention as to whether this is the +time for revision, and what line the revision should take. The nature +of the last attempted revision, in the reign of William III,[6] will +make the liturgical student profoundly grateful that that proposed +revision was rejected, and will suggest infinite caution before +entrusting a new revision to any but proved experts, and liturgical +specialists.[7] + +Whatever changes are made, they should, at least, be based on two +principles--permanence and progress. The essence of progress is +loyalty to the past. Nothing should be touched that is a permanent +part of the Ancient Office Books; nothing should be omitted, or added, +that is outside the teaching of the Universal Church. For the +immediate present, we would ask that the {46} Prayer Book should be +left untouched, but that an Appendix, consisting of many unauthorized +services now in use, should be "put forth by authority," i.e. by the +sanction of the Bishops. + +(2) _The Administration of the Sacraments of the Church_.--The +Sacraments are the treasures of the whole Church; the way in which they +may be "administered" is left to the decision of that part of the +Church in which they are administered. Take, once again, the question +of language. One part of the Church has as much right to administer +the Sacraments in English as another part has to administer them in +Latin, or another part in Greek. For instance, the words, "This is My +Body" in the English Liturgy are quite as near to the original as "_Hoc +est Corpus Meum_" is in the Latin Liturgy. Each Church has a right to +make its own regulations for its own people. + +So with "rites and ceremonies". Provided the essence of the Sacrament +is not touched, the addition or omission of particular rites and +ceremonies does not affect the validity of the Sacrament. For, the +title of the Prayer Book carefully distinguishes between "The Church" +and "The Church of England," "the _Sacraments_" and the +"_administration_ of the Sacraments". It is for {47} _administrative +purposes_ that there is an English "Use," i.e. an English method of +administering the Sacraments of the Universal Church. It is this use +which the title-page calls:-- + +(3) _The Use of the Church of England_.--This "Use" may vary at +different times, and even in different dioceses. We read of one "Use" +in the Diocese of York; another in the Diocese of Sarum, or Salisbury; +another in the Diocese of Hereford; another in the Diocese of Bangor; +and so on. Indeed, there were so many different Uses at one time that, +for the sake of unity, one Use was substituted for many; and that Use, +sufficient in all essentials, is found in our "Book of Common Prayer ". + + + +(II) THE PREFACE. + +It was written, in 1661, by Bishop Sanderson, and amended by the Upper +House of Convocation. + +What, we ask, do these preface-writers say about the book to which they +gave their _imprimatur_? + +First, they state their position. They have no intention whatever of +writing a new book. Their aim is to adapt old books to new needs. +{48} Adaptation, not invention, is their aim. Four times in their +short Preface they refer us to "the ancient Fathers" as their guides. + +Next, they state their object. Two dangers, they tell us, have to be +avoided. In compiling a Liturgy from Ancient Sources, one danger will +be that of "too much stiffness in _refusing_" new matter--i.e. letting +a love of permanence spoil progress: another, and opposite danger, will +be "too much easiness in _admitting_" any variation--i.e. letting a +love of progress spoil permanence. They will try to avoid both +dangers. "It hath been the wisdom of the Church of England to keep the +mean between the two extremes," when either extreme runs away from the +"faith once delivered to the Saints ". + +Another object they had in view was to give a prominent place to Holy +Scripture. "So that here," they say, "you have an Order for Prayer, +and for the reading of the Holy Scriptures, much agreeable to the mind +and purpose of _the old Fathers_." + +Next, they deal with the principles which underlie all ritualism. In +speaking "of Ceremonies, why some be abolished and some {49} retained," +they lay it down that, "although the keeping or admitting of a +Ceremony, in itself considered, is but a small thing, yet the wilful +and contemptuous transgression and breaking of a Common Order and +discipline is no small offence before God". Then, in a golden +sentence, they add: "Whereas the minds of men are so diverse that some +think it a great matter of conscience to depart from a piece of the +least of their ceremonies, they be so addicted to their old customs; +and, again, on the other side, some be so new-fangled that they would +innovate all things, and so despise the old, that nothing can like +them, but that is new: it was thought expedient, not so much to have +respect how to please and satisfy either of these parties, as _how to +please God_, and profit them both". + +Finally, whilst wishing to ease men from the oppressive burden of a +multitude of ceremonies, "whereof St. Augustine, in his time, +complained," they assert the right of each Church to make its own +ritual-rules (in conformity with the rules of the whole Church), +provided that it imposes them on no one else. "And in these our doings +we condemn no other nations, nor prescribe anything but to our own +people only; for we think it {50} convenient that every country should +use such ceremonies as they shall think best." + +It is necessary to call attention to all this, because few Church +people seem to know anything about the intentions, objects, and +principles of the compilers, as stated by themselves in the Prayer Book +Preface. + + + +(III) THE CONTENTS. + +These a reviewer might briefly deal with under three heads--Doctrine, +Discipline, and Devotion. + + +_Doctrine._ + +The importance of this cannot be exaggerated. The English Prayer Book +is, for the ordinary Churchman, a standard of authority when +theological doctors differ. The _Prayer Book_ is the Court of Appeal +from the pulpit--just as the Undivided Church is the final Court of +Appeal from the Prayer Book. Many a man is honestly puzzled and +worried at the charge so frequently levelled at the Church of England, +that one preacher flatly contradicts another, and that what is taught +as truth in one church is denied as heresy in another. This is, of +course, by no {51} means peculiar to the Church of England, but it is +none the less a loss to the unity of Christendom. + +The whole mischief arises from treating the individual preacher as if +he were the Book of Common Prayer. It is to the Prayer Book, not to +the Pulpit, that we must go to prove what is taught. For instance, I +go into one church, and I hear one preacher deny the doctrine of +Baptismal Regeneration; I go into another, and I hear the same doctrine +taught as the very essence of The Faith. I ask, in despair, what does +the Church of England teach? which teacher am I to believe? What is +the answer? It is this. I am not bound to believe either teacher, +until I have tested his utterances by some authorized book. This book +is the Prayer Book. What does the Church of England Prayer Book--not +this or that preacher--say is the teaching of the Church of England? +In the case quoted, this is the Prayer Book answer: "Seeing now, dearly +beloved brethren, that _this child is regenerate_".[8] Here is +something clear, crisp, definite. It is the authorized expression of +the belief of the Church of England in common with the whole Catholic +Church. + +{52} + +Or, I hear two sermons on conversion. In one, conversion is almost +sneered at, or, at least, apologized for; in another, it is taught with +all the fervour of a personal experience. What am I to believe? What +does the Church of England teach about it? What does the Prayer Book +say? Open it at the Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul, or at the +third Collect for Good Friday, and you will hear a trumpet which gives +no uncertain sound. + +Or, I am wondering and worried about Confession and Absolution. What +does the Church of England teach about them? One preacher says one +thing, one another. But what is the Church of England's authoritative +utterance on the subject? Open your Prayer Book, and you will see: you +will find that, with the rest of the Christian Church, she provides for +both, in public and in private, for the strong, and for the sick. + +This, at least, is the view an honest onlooker will take of our +position. A common-sense Nonconformist minister, wishing to teach his +people and to get at facts, studies the English Prayer Book. This is +his conclusion: "Free Churchmen," he writes, "dissent from much of the +teaching of the Book of Common Prayer. In {53} the service of Baptism, +expressions are used which naturally lead persons to regard it as a +means of salvation. God is asked to 'sanctify this water to the +mystical washing away of sin'. After Baptism, God is thanked for +having 'regenerated the child with His Holy Spirit'. It is called the +'laver of regeneration,' by which the child, being born in sin, is +received into the number of God's children. In the Catechism, the +child is taught to say of Baptism, 'wherein I was made the child of +God'. It is said to be 'generally necessary to salvation,' and the +rubric declares that children who are baptized, and die before they +commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved'."[9] What could be a fairer +statement of the Prayer-Book teaching? And he goes on: "In the +visitation of the sick, if the sick person makes a confession of his +sins, and 'if he heartily and humbly desire it,' the Priest is bidden +to absolve him. The form of Absolution is '... I absolve thee from all +thy sins in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy +Ghost'. In the Ordination Service, the Bishop confers the power of +Absolution upon the Priest." Nothing could be fairer. It is precisely +what the Church {54} of England _does_ teach in her authorized +formularies which Archbishop Cranmer gathered together from the old +Service-books of the ancient Church of England. + +The pulpit passes: the Prayer Book remains. + + +_Discipline._ + +The Prayer Book deals with principles, rather than with details--though +details have their place. It is a book of discipline, "as well for the +body as the soul". It disciplines the body for the sake of the soul; +it disciplines the soul for the sake of the body. Now it tightens, now +it relaxes, the human bow. For example, in the _Table of Feasts and +Fasts_, it lays down one principle which underlies all bodily and +spiritual discipline--the need of training to obtain self-control. The +_principle_ laid down is that I am to discipline myself at stated times +and seasons, in order that I may not be undisciplined at any times or +seasons. I am to rejoice as a duty on certain days, that I may live in +the joy of the Redeemed on other days. Feasts and Fasts have a +meaning, and I cannot deliberately ignore the Prayer-Book Table without +suffering loss. + +It is the same with the rubrical directions as to {55} ritual. I am +ordered to stand when praising, to kneel when praying. The underlying +_principle_ is that I am not to do things in my own way, without regard +to others, but to do them in an orderly way, and as one of many. I am +learning to sink the individual in the society. So with the directions +as to vestments--whether they are the Eucharistic vestments, ordered by +the "Ornaments Rubric," or the preacher's Geneva gown not ordered +anywhere. The _principle_ laid down is, special things for special +occasions; all else is a matter of degree. One form of Ceremonial will +appeal to one temperament, a different form to another. "I like a +grand Ceremonial," writes Dr. Bright, "and I own that Lights and +Vestments give me real pleasure. But then I should be absurd if I +expected that everybody else, who had the same faith as myself, should +necessarily have the same feeling as to the form of its +expression."[10] From the subjective and disciplinary point of view, +the mark of the Cross must be stamped on many of our own likes and +dislikes, both in going without, and in bearing with, ceremonial, +especially in small towns and villages where there is only one church. +The principle {56} which says, "You shan't have it because I don't like +it," or, "You shall have it because I do like it," leads to all sorts +of confusion. As Dr. Liddon says: "When men know what the revelation +of God in His Blessed Son really is, all else follows in due +time--reverence on one side and charity on the other".[11] + + + +_Devotion._ + +Reading the Prayer Book as it stands, from Matins to the Consecration +of an Archbishop, no reviewer could miss its devotional beauty. It is, +perhaps, a misfortune that the most beautiful Office of the Christian +Church, the Eucharistic Office, should come in the middle, instead of +at the beginning, of our Prayer Book, first in order as first in +importance. Its character, though capable of much enrichment, reminds +us of how much devotional beauty the Prayer Book has from ancient +sources. In our jealous zeal for more beauty we are, perhaps, apt to +underrate much that we already possess. God won't give us more than we +have until we have learnt to value that which we possess. + +It is impossible, in the time that remains, to {57} do more than +emphasize one special form of beauty in "The Book of Common +Prayer"--The Collects. The Prayer-Book Collects are pictures of +beauty. Only compare a modern collect with the Prayer-Book Collects, +and you will see the difference without much looking. + +Learn to value the Prayer Book. From birth to death it provides, as we +shall see, special offices, and special prayers for the main events of +our lives, though many minor events are still unprovided for. + + + +[1] See p. 13. + +[2] Possibly, the origin of the British Liturgy revised by St. +Augustine, and of the present Liturgy of the English Church. + +[3] From _vulgus_, a crowd. + +[4] Cf. Acts iv. 24, "They lifted up their voices _with one accord_". + +[5] The word _Mass_, which has caused such storms of controversy, +originally meant a _dismissal_ of the congregation. It is found in +words such as Christ-mas (i.e. a short name for the Eucharist on the +Feast of the Nativity), Candle-mas, Martin-mas, Michael-mas, and so on. + +[6] This was published _in extenso_ in a Blue Book, issued by the +Government on 2 June, 1854. + +[7] It is difficult to see how any revision could obtain legal +sanction, even if prepared by Convocation, save by an Act of Parliament +after free discussion by the present House of Commons. + +[8] Public Baptism of Infants. + +[9] "The Folkestone Baptist," June, 1899. + +[10] "Letters and Memoirs of William Bright," p. 143. + +[11] "Life and Letters of H. P. Liddon," p. 329. + + + + +{58} + +CHAPTER IV. + +THE CHURCH'S SACRAMENTS. + +We have seen that a National Church is the means whereby the Catholic +Church reaches the nation; that her function is (1) to teach, and (2) +to feed the nation; that she teaches through her books, and feeds +through her Sacraments. + +We now come to the second of these two functions--the spiritual feeding +of the nation. This she does through the Sacraments--a word which +comes from the Latin _sacrare_ (from _sacer_), sacred.[1] The +Sacraments are the sacred _media_ through which the soul of man is fed +with the grace of God. + +{59} + +We may think of them under three heads:--their number; their nature; +their names. + + + +(I) THE NUMBER OF THE SACRAMENTS. + +In the early Church the number was unlimited. After the twelfth +century, the number was technically limited to seven. Partly owing to +the mystic number seven,[2] and partly because seven seemed to meet the +needs of all sorts and conditions of men, the septenary number of +Sacraments became either fixed or special. The Latin Church taught +that there were "seven, and seven only": the Greek Church specialized +seven, without limiting their number: the English Church picked out +seven, specializing two as "generally necessary to salvation"[3] and +five (such as Confirmation and Marriage) as "commonly called +Sacraments".[4] + +The English Church, then, teaches that, without arbitrarily limiting +their number, there are seven special means of grace, either "generally +necessary" for all, or specially provided for some. And, as amongst +her books she selects two, and calls them "_The_ Bible," and "_The_ +Prayer {60} Book," so amongst her Sacraments she deliberately marks out +two for a primacy of honour. + +These two are so supreme, as being "ordained by Christ Himself"; so +pre-eminent, as flowing directly from the Wounded Side, that she calls +them "the Sacraments of the Gospel". They are, above all other +Sacraments, "glad tidings of great joy" to every human being. And +these two are "generally necessary," i.e. necessary for all alike--they +are _generaliter_, i.e. for _all_ and not only for _special_ states +(such as Holy Orders): they are "for _every_ man in his vocation and +ministry". The other five are not necessarily essential for all. They +have not all "the like nature of Sacraments of the Gospel," in that +they were not all "ordained by Christ Himself". It is the nature of +the two Sacraments of the Gospel that we now consider. + + + +(II) THE NATURE OF THE SACRAMENTS. + +"What meanest thou by this word, Sacrament?" The Catechism, confining +its answer to the two greater Sacraments, replies: "I mean an outward +and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace..."[5] + +{61} + +Putting this into more modern language, we might say that a Sacrament +is a supernatural conjunction of spirit and matter.[6] It is not +matter only; it is not spirit only; it is not matter opposed to spirit, +but spirit of which matter is the expression, and "the ultimate +reality". Thus, for a perfect Sacrament, there must be both "the +outward and visible" (matter), and "the inward and spiritual" (spirit). +It is the conjunction of the two which makes the Sacrament. Thus, a +Sacrament is not wholly under the conditions of material laws, nor is +it wholly under the conditions of spiritual laws; it is under the +conditions of what (for lack of any other name) we call _Sacramental_ +laws. As yet, we know comparatively little of either material or +spiritual laws, and we cannot be surprised that we know still less of +Sacramental laws. We are in the student stage, and are perpetually +revising our conclusions. {62} In all three cases, we very largely +"walk by faith". + +But this at least we may say of Sacraments. Matter without spirit +cannot effect that which matter with spirit can, and does, effect. As +in the Incarnation, God[7] expresses Himself through matter[8]--so it +is in the Sacraments. In Baptism, the Holy Spirit "expresses Himself" +through water: in the Eucharist, through bread and wine. In each case, +the perfect integrity of matter and of spirit are essential to the +validity of the Sacrament. In each case, it is the conjunction of the +two which guarantees the full effect of either.[9] + + + +(III) THE NAMES OF THE SACRAMENTS. + +As given in the Prayer Book, these are seven--"Baptism, and the Supper +of the Lord," Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Unction. + +We will think now of the two first. + + + +[1] St. Leo defines a Sacrament thus: "_Sacramentum_. (1) It +originally signified the pledge or deposit in money which in certain +suits according to Roman Law plaintiff and defendant were alike bound +to make; (2) it came to signify a pledge of military fidelity, a +_voluntary_ oath; (3) then the _exacted_ oath of allegiance; (4) any +oath whatever; (5) in early Christian use any sacred or solemn act, and +especially any mystery where more was meant than met the ear or eye" +(Blight's "Select Sermons of St. Leo on the Incarnation," p. 136). + +[2] Symbolical of completion. + +[3] Church Catechism. + +[4] Article XXV. + +[5] The answer is borrowed from Peter Lombard (a pupil of Abelard and +Professor of Theology, and for a short time Bishop of Paris), who +defines a Sacrament as a "visible sign of an invisible grace," probably +himself borrowing the thought from St. Augustine. + +[6] Dr. Illingworth calls "the material order another aspect of the +spiritual, which is gradually revealing itself through material +concealment, in the greater and lesser Christian Sacraments, which +radiate from the Incarnation" ("Sermons Preached in a College Chapel," +p. 173). + +[7] God is _Spirit_, St. John iv. 24. + +[8] The Word was made _Flesh_, St. John i. 14. + +[9] The water in Baptism is not, of course, _consecrated_, as the bread +and wine are in the Eucharist. It does not, like the bread and wine, +"become what it was not, without ceasing to be what it was," but it is +"_sanctified_ to the mystical washing away of sins". + + + + + +{63} + +CHAPTER V. + +BAPTISM. + +Consider, What it is; + What it does; + How it does it. + + + +(I) WHAT IT IS. + +The Sacrament of Baptism is the supernatural conjunction of matter and +spirit--of water and the Holy Ghost. Water must be there, and spirit +must be there. It is by the conjunction of the two that the Baptized +is "born anew of water and of the Holy Ghost". + +So the Prayer Book teaches. At the reception of a privately baptized +child into the Church, it is laid down that "matter" and "words" are +the two essentials for a valid Baptism.[1] "Because some things +essential to this Sacrament may happen to be omitted (and thus +invalidate the Sacrament), ... I demand," says the priest, {64} "with +what matter was this child baptized?" and "with what words was this +child baptized?" And because the omission of right matter or right +words would invalidate the Sacrament, further inquiry is made, and the +god-parents are asked: "by whom was this child baptized?": "who was +present when this child was baptized?" Additional security is taken, +if there is the slightest reason to question the evidence given. The +child is then given "Conditional Baptism," and Baptism is administered +with the conditional words: "If thou art not already baptized,"--for +Baptism cannot be repeated--"I baptize thee in the name of the Father, +and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." So careful is the +Church both in administering and guarding the essentials of the +Sacrament. + +And notice: nothing but the water and the words are _essential_. Other +things may, or may not, be edifying; they are not essential; they are +matters of ecclesiastical regulation, not of Divine appointment. Thus, +a _Priest_ is not essential to a valid Baptism, as he is for a valid +Eucharist. A Priest is the normal, but not the necessary, instrument +of Baptism. "In the absence of a {65} Priest"[2] a Deacon may baptize, +and if the child is _in extremis_, any one, of either sex, may baptize. + +Again, _Sponsors_ are not essential to the validity of the Sacrament. +Sponsors are safeguards, not essentials. They are only a part--an +invaluable part--of ecclesiastical regulation. When, in times of +persecution, parents might be put to death, other parents were chosen +as parents-in-God (God-parents)[3] to safeguard the child's Christian +career. Sponsors are "sureties" of the Church, not parts of the +Sacraments. They stand at the font, as fully admitted Church members, +to welcome a new member into the Brotherhood. But a private Baptism +without Sponsors would be a valid Baptism. + +So, too, in regard to _Ceremonial_. The mode of administering the +Sacrament may vary: it is not (apart from the matter and words) of the +essence of the Sacrament. There are, in fact, three ways in which +Baptism may be validly administered. It may be administered by +_Immersion_, _Aspersion_, or _Affusion_. + +Immersion (_in-mergere_, to dip into) is the original and primitive +form of administration. {66} As the word suggests, it consists of +dipping the candidate into the water--river, bath, or font. + +Aspersion (_ad spargere_, to sprinkle upon) is not a primitive form of +administration. It consists in sprinkling water upon the candidate's +forehead. + +Affusion (_ad fundere_, to pour upon) is the allowed alternative to +Immersion. It consists in pouring water upon the candidate. + +All these methods are valid. Immersion was the Apostolic method, and +explains most vividly the Apostolic teaching (in which the Candidate is +"buried with Christ" by immersion, and rises again by emersion)[4] no +less than the meaning of the word--from the Greek _baptizo_, to dip. +Provision for Immersion has been made by a Fontgrave, in Lambeth Parish +Church, erected in memory of Archbishop Benson, and constantly made use +of. But, even in Apostolic times, Baptism by "Affusion" was allowed to +the sick and was equally valid. In the Prayer Book, affusion is either +permitted (as in the Public Baptism of infants), or ordered (as in the +Private Baptism of infants), or, again, allowed (as in the Baptism of +those of riper years). It will be {67} noted that the Church of +England makes no allusion to "Aspersion," or the "sprinkling" form of +administration. The child or adult is always either to be dipped into +the water, or to have water poured upon it.[5] Other ceremonies there +are--ancient and mediaeval. Some are full of beauty, but none are +essential. Thus, in the first Prayer Book of 1549, a white vesture, +called the _Chrisome_[6] or _Chrism_, was put upon the candidate, the +Priest saying: "Take this white vesture for a token of innocency which, +by God's grace, in the Holy Sacrament of Baptism, is given unto thee". +It typified the white life to which the one anointed with the Chrisma, +or symbolical oil, was dedicated.[7] + +{68} + +Another ancient custom was to give the newly baptized _milk and honey_. +So, St. Clement of Alexandria writes: "As soon as we are born again, we +become entitled to the hope of rest, the promise of Jerusalem which is +above, where it is said to rain milk and honey". + +_Consignation_, again, or the "signing with the sign of the cross," +dates from a very early period.[8] It marks the child as belonging to +the Good Shepherd, even as a lamb is marked with the owner's mark or +sign. + +Giving salt as a symbol of wisdom (_sal sapientiae_); placing a lighted +taper in the child's hand, typifying the illuminating Spirit; turning +to the west to renounce the enemy of the Faith, and then to the east to +recite our belief in that Faith; striking three blows with the hand, +symbolical of fighting against the world, the flesh, and the devil: all +such ceremonies, and many more, have their due place, and mystic +meaning: but they are not part of the Sacrament. They are, {69} as it +were, scenery, beautiful scenery, round the Sacrament; frescoes on the +walls; the "beauty of holiness"; "lily-work upon the top of the +pillars";[9] the handmaids of the Sacrament, but not essential to the +Sacrament. To deny that the Church of England rightly and duly +administers the Sacrament because she omits any one of these +ceremonies, is to confuse the picture with the frame, the jewel with +its setting, the beautiful with the essential.[10] + +We may deplore the loss of this or that Ceremony, but a National Church +exercises her undoubted right in saying at any particular period of her +history how the Sacrament is to be administered, provided the +essentials of the Sacrament are left untouched. The Church Universal +decides, once for all, what is essential: {70} the National Church +decides how best to secure and safeguard these essentials for her own +_Use_. + + + +(II) WHAT IT DOES. + +According to the Scriptures, "_Baptism doth now save us_".[11] As God +did "save Noah and his family in the Ark from perishing by water," so +does God save the human family from perishing by sin. As Noah and his +family could, by an act of free will, have opened a window in the Ark, +and have leapt into the waters, and frustrated God's purpose after they +had been saved, so can any member of the human family, after it has +been taken into the "Ark of Christ's Church," frustrate God's "good +will towards" it, and wilfully leap out of its saving shelter. Baptism +is "a beginning," not an end.[12] It puts us into a state of +Salvation. It starts us in the way of Salvation. St. Cyprian says +that in Baptism "we start crowned," and St. John says: "Hold fast that +which thou hast that no man take thy crown".[13] Baptism is the +Sacrament of initiation, not of finality. Directly the child is +baptized, we pray that he "may lead the rest of his life according {71} +to _this beginning_," and we heartily thank God for having, in Baptism, +called us into a state of Salvation. In this sense, "Baptism doth save +us". + +But what does it save us from? Sin. In the Nicene Creed we say: "I +believe in one Baptism for the remission of _sins_". Baptism saves us +from our sins. + +In the case of infants, Baptism saves from original, or inherited, +sin--the sin whose origin can be traced to the Fall. In the case of +adults, Baptism saves from both original and actual sin, both birth sin +and life sin. + +The Prayer Book is as explicit as the Bible on this point. In the case +of infants, we pray: + +"We call upon Thee for this infant, that he, _coming to Thy Holy +Baptism_, may receive remission of his sins"--before, i.e., the child +has, by free will choice, committed actual sin. In the case of adults, +we read: "Well-beloved, who are come hither desiring _to receive Holy +Baptism_, ye have heard how the congregation hath prayed, that our Lord +Jesus Christ would vouchsafe to ... _release you of your sins_". And, +again, dealing with infants, the Rubric at the end of the "Public +Baptism of Infants" declares that "It is certain, by God's Word, that +children _who are {72} baptized_, dying before they commit _actual +sin_, are undoubtedly saved". + +In affirming this, the Church does not condemn all the unbaptized, +infants or adults, to everlasting perdition, as the teaching of some +is. Every affirmation does not necessarily involve its opposite +negation. It was thousands of years before any souls at all were +baptized on earth, and even now, few[14] in comparison with the total +population of the civilized and uncivilized world, have been baptized. +The Church nowhere assumes the self-imposed burden of legislation for +these, or limits their chance of salvation to the Church Militant. +What she does do, is to proclaim her unswerving belief in "one Baptism +for the remission of sins"; and her unfailing faith in God's promises +to those who _are_ baptized--"which promise, He, for His part, will +most surely keep and perform". On this point, she speaks with nothing +short of "undoubted certainty"; on the other point, she is silent. She +does not condemn an infant because no responsible person has brought it +to Baptism, though she does condemn the person for not bringing it. +She does not limit {73} the power of grace to souls in this life only, +but she does offer grace in this world, which may land the soul safely +in the world to come. + +One other thing Baptism does. Making the child a member of Christ, it +gives it a "Christ-ian" name. + + + +_The Christian Name_. + +This Christian, or fore-name as it was called, is the real name. It +antedates the surname by many centuries, surnames being unknown in +England before the Norman invasion. The Christian name is the +Christ-name. It cannot, by any known legal method, be changed. +Surnames may be changed in various legal ways: not so the Christian +name.[15] This was more apparent when the baptized were given only one +Christian name, for it was not until the eighteenth century that a +second or third name was added, and then only on grounds of convenience. + +Again, according to the law of England, the only legal way in which a +Christian name can be given, is by Baptism. Thus, if a child has been +registered in one name, and is afterwards baptized {74} in another, the +Baptismal, and not the registered, name is its legal name, even if the +registered name was given first. + +It is strange that, in view of all this, peers should drop their +Christian names, i.e. their real names, their Baptismal names. The +custom, apparently, dates only from the Stuart period, and is not easy +to account for. It would seem to suggest a distinct loss. The same +loss, if it be a loss, is incurred by the Town Clerk of London, who +omits his Christian name in signing official documents.[16] The King, +more happily, retains his Baptismal or Christian name, and has no +surname.[17] Bishops sign themselves by both their {75} Christian and +official name, as "Randall Cantuar; Cosmo Ebor.; A. F. London; H. E. +Winton; F. Oxon.". + +We may consider three words, both helps and puzzles, used in connexion +with Holy Baptism: _Regeneration, Adoption, Election_. Each has its +own separate teaching, though there are points at which their meanings +run into each other. + + + +_Regeneration_. + +"We yield Thee hearty thanks that it hath pleased Thee to regenerate +this infant." So runs the Prayer-Book thanksgiving after baptism. +What does it mean? The word regeneration comes from two Latin words, +_re_, again, _generare_, to generate, and means exactly what it says. +In Prayer-Book language, it means being "_born again_". And, notice, +it refers to infants as well {76} as to adults. The new birth is as +independent of the child's choice as the natural birth. + +And this is just what we should expect from a God of love. The child +is not consulted about his first birth, neither is he consulted about +his second birth. He does not wait (as the Baptists teach) until he is +old enough to make a free choice of second birth, but as soon as he is +born into the world ("within seven or fourteen days," the Prayer Book +orders) he is reborn into the Church. Grace does not let nature get +ten to twenty years' start, but gives the soul a fair chance from the +very first: and so, and only so, is a God of love "justified in His +saying, and clear when He is judged". + + + +_Adoption_. + +But there is a second word. The Baptismal Thanksgiving calls the +Baptized "God's own child by Adoption". A simple illustration will +best explain the word. When a man is "naturalized," he speaks of his +new country as the land of his _adoption_. If a Frenchman becomes a +naturalized Englishman, he ceases legally to be a Frenchman; ceases to +be under French law; ceases to serve in the French army. He {77} +becomes legally an Englishman; he is under English law; serves in the +English army; has all the privileges and obligations of a "new-born" +Englishman. He may turn out to be a bad Englishman, a traitor to his +adopted country; he may even hanker after his old life as a +Frenchman--but he has left one kingdom for another, and, good, bad, or +indifferent, he is a subject of his new King; he is a son of his +adopted country. He cannot belong to two kingdoms, serve under two +kings, live under two sets of laws, at the same time. + +It is so with the Baptized. He has been "adopted" into a new kingdom. +He is a subject of "the Kingdom of Heaven". But he cannot belong to +two kingdoms at the same time. His "death unto sin" involves a "new +birth (regeneration) unto righteousness". He ceases to be a member of +the old kingdom, to serve under the sway of the old king, to be a +"child of wrath". He renounces all allegiance to Satan; he becomes +God's own child by "adoption". He may be a good, bad, or indifferent +child; he may be a lost child, but he does not cease to be God's child. +Rather, it is just because he is still God's child that there is hope +for him. It is because he is {78} the child of God by adoption that +the "spirit of adoption" within him can still cry, "Abba, Father," that +he can still claim the privilege of his adopted country, and "pardon +through the Precious Blood". True, he has obligations and +responsibilities, as well as privileges, and these we shall see under +the next word, Election. + + + +_Election_. + +The Catechism calls the Baptized "the elect people of God," and the +Baptismal Service asks that the child may by Baptism be "taken into the +number of God's elect children". What does it mean? The word itself +comes from two Latin words, _e_, or _ex_, out; and _lego_, to choose. +The "elect," then, are those chosen out from others. It sounds like +favouritism; it reads like "privileged classes"--and so it is. But the +privilege of election is the privilege of service. It is like the +privilege of a Member of Parliament, the favoured candidate--the +privilege of being elected to serve others. Every election is for the +sake of somebody else. The Member of Parliament is elected for the +sake of his constituents; the Town Councillor is elected for the sake +of his fellow-townsmen; the Governor is elected for the sake of the +{79} governed. It is so with spiritual elections. The Jews were +"elect"; but it was for the sake of the Gentiles--"that the Gentiles, +through them, might be brought in". The Blessed Virgin was "elect"; +but it was that "all generations might call her blessed". The Church +is "elect," but it is for the sake of the world,--that it, too, might +be "brought in". No election ends with itself. The Baptized are +"elect," but not for their own sakes; not to be a privileged class, +save to enjoy the privilege of bringing others in. They are "chosen +out" of the world for the sake of those left in the world. This is +their obligation; it is the law of their adopted country, the kingdom +into which they have, "by spiritual regeneration," been "born again". + +All this, and much more, Baptism does. How does it do it? + + + +(III) HOW DOES IT DO IT? + +This new Birth! How is it accomplished? Nobody knows. How Baptism +causes all that it effects, is as yet unrevealed. The Holy Ghost moves +upon the face of the waters, but His operation is overshadowed. Here, +we are in the realm of faith. Faith is belief in that which is out of +{80} sight. It is belief in the unseen, not in the non-existent. We +hope for that we see not.[18] The _mode_ of the operation of the Holy +Ghost in Baptism is hidden: the result alone is revealed. In this, as +in many another mystery, "We wait for light".[19] + + + +[1] See Service for the "Private Baptism of Children". + +[2] Service for the Ordination of Deacons. + +[3] From an old word, Gossip or _Godsib_, i.e. God relation. + +[4] Cf. Rom. vi. 4; Eph. v. 26. + +[5] _Trine_ Immersion, i.e. dipping the candidate thrice, or thrice +pouring water upon him, dates from the earliest ages, but exceptional +cases have occurred where a single immersion has been held valid. + +[6] From _Chrisma_, sacred oil--first the oil with which a child was +anointed at Baptism, and then the robe with which the child was covered +after Baptism and Unction, and hence the child itself was called a +_Chrisome-child_, i.e. a child wearing the Chrisome robe. + +[7] In the 1549 Prayer Book, the Prayer at the Anointing in the +Baptismal Service ran: "Almighty God, Who hath regenerated thee by +water and the Holy Ghost, and hath given unto thee the remission of all +thy sins, He vouchsafe to anoint thee with the Unction of His Holy +Spirit, and bring thee to the inheritance of everlasting life. _Amen_." + +[8] St. Jerome, writing in the second century, says of the Baptized, +that he "bore on his forehead the banner of the Cross". + +[9] 1 Kings vii. 22. + +[10] It is a real loss to use the Service for the Public Baptism of +Infants as a private office, as is generally done now. The doctrinal +teaching; the naming of the child; the signing with the cross; the +response of, and the address to, the God-parents--all these would be +helpful reminders to a congregation, if the service sometimes came, as +the Rubric orders, after the second lesson, and might rekindle the +Baptismal and Confirmation fire once lighted, but so often allowed to +die down, or flicker out. + +[11] 1 Pet. iii. 21. + +[12] Baptismal Service. + +[13] Rev. iii. 11. + +[14] Not more, it is estimated, than two or three out of every eight +have been baptized. + +[15] I may take an _additional_ Christian name at my Confirmation, but +I cannot change the old one. + +[16] The present Town Clerk of London has kindly informed me that the +earliest example he has found dates from 1418, when the name of John +Carpenter, Town Clerk, the well-known executor of Whittington, is +appended to a document, the Christian name being omitted. + +[17] The following letter from Mr. Ambrose Lee of the Heralds' College +may interest some. "... Surname, in the ordinary sense of the word, +the King has none. He--as was his grandmother, Queen Victoria, as well +as her husband, Prince Albert--is descended from Witikind, who was the +last of a long line of continental Saxon kings or rulers. Witikind was +defeated by Charlemagne, became a Christian, and was created Duke of +Saxony. He had a second son, who was Count of Wettin, but clear and +well-defined and authenticated genealogies do not exist from which may +be formulated any theory establishing, by right or custom, _any_ +surname, in the ordinary accepted sense of the word, for the various +families who are descended in the male line from this Count of +Wettin.... And, by-the-by, it must not be forgotten that the earliest +Guelphs were merely princes whose baptismal name was Guelph, as the +baptismal name of our Hanoverian Kings was George." + +[18] Rom. viii. 25. + +[19] Is. lix. 9. + + + + +{81} + +CHAPTER VI. + +THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. + +The Blessed Sacrament!--or, as the Prayer Book calls it, "The Holy +Sacrament". This title seems to sum up all the other titles by which +the chief service in the Church is known. These are many. For +instance:-- + +_The Liturgy_, from the Greek _Leitourgia_,[1] a public service. + +_The Mass_, from the Latin _Missa_, dismissal--the word used in the +Latin Liturgy when the people are dismissed,[2] and afterwards applied +to the service itself from which they are dismissed. + +_The Eucharist_, from the Greek _Eucharistia_, thanksgiving--the word +used in all the narratives {82} of Institution,[3] and, technically, +the third part of the Eucharistic Service. + +_The Breaking of the Bread_, one of the earliest names for the +Sacrament (Acts ii. 42, 1 Cor. x. 16). + +_The Holy Sacrifice_, which Christ once offered, and is ever offering. + +_The Lord's Supper_ (1 Cor. xii. 10), a name perhaps originally used +for the _Agape_, or love feast, which preceded the Eucharist, and then +given to the Eucharist itself. It is an old English name, used in the +story of St. Anselm's last days, where it is said: "He passed away as +morning was breaking on the Wednesday before _the day of our Lord's +Supper_". + +_The Holy Communion_ (1 Cor. x. 16), in which our baptismal union with +Christ is consummated, and which forms a means of union between souls +in the Church Triumphant, at Rest, and on Earth. In it, Christ, God +and Man, is the bond of oneness. + +All these, and other aspects of the Sacrament, are comprehended and +gathered up in the name which marks its supremacy,--The Blessed +Sacrament. + +{83} + +Consider: What it is; + What it does; + How it does it. + + + +(I) WHAT IT IS. + +It is the supernatural conjunction of matter and spirit, of Bread and +Wine and of the Holy Ghost. Here, as in Baptism, the "inward and +spiritual" expresses itself through the "outward and visible". Both +must be there. And, notice again. This conjunction is not a +_physical_ conjunction, according to physical laws; nor is it a +spiritual conjunction, according to spiritual laws; it is a Sacramental +conjunction, according to Sacramental laws. As in Baptism, so in the +Blessed Sacrament: the "outward and visible" is, and remains, subject +to natural laws, and the inward and spiritual to spiritual laws; but +the Sacrament itself is under neither natural nor spiritual but +Sacramental laws. + +For a perfect Sacrament requires both matter and spirit.[4] If either +is absent, the Sacrament is incomplete. + +Thus, the Council of Trent's definition of {84} _Transubstantiation_[5] +seems, as it stands, to spoil the very nature of a Sacrament. It is +the "change of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, of the +whole substance of the wine into the blood of Christ, _only the +appearance_ of bread and wine remaining". + +Again, the Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation destroys the nature +of the Sacrament. The Lutheran _Formula Concordiae_, e.g., teaches +that "_outside the use the Body of Christ is not present_". Thus it +limits the Presence to the reception, whether by good or bad. + +The _Figurative_ view of the Blessed Sacrament {85} destroys the nature +of a Sacrament, making the matter symbolize something which is not +there. + +It is safer to take the words of consecration as they stand, +corresponding as they do so literally with the words of Institution, +and simply to say: "This (bread: it is still bread) is My Body" (it is +far more than bread); "this (wine: it is still wine) is My Blood" (it +is far more than wine). Can we get beyond this, in terms and +definitions? Can we say more than that it is a "Sacrament"--The +Blessed Sacrament? And after all, do we wish to do so? + + + +(II) WHAT IT DOES. + +Briefly, the Blessed Sacrament does two things; It pleads, and It +feeds. It is the pleading _of_ the one Sacrifice; It is the feeding +_on_ the one Sacrifice. + +These two aspects of the one Sacrament are suggested in the two names, +_Altar_ and _Table_.[6] Both words are liturgical. In Western +Liturgies, _Altar_ is the rule, and _Table_ the exception; in Eastern +Liturgies, _Table_ is the rule, and _Altar_ {86} the exception. Both +are, perhaps, embodied in the old name, _God's Board_, of Thomas +Aquinas. Both contain a truth. + + + +_The Altar_. + +This, for over 300 years, was the common name for what St. Irenaeus +calls "the Abode of the Holy Body and Blood of Christ". Convocation, +in 1640, decreed: "It is, and may be called, an Altar in that sense in +which the Primitive Church called it an Altar, and in no other". This +sense referred to the offering of what the Liturgy of St. James calls +"the tremendous and unbloody Sacrifice," the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom +"the reasonable and unbloody Sacrifice,"[7] and the Ancient English +Liturgy "a pure offering, an holy offering, an undefiled offering, even +the holy Bread of eternal Life, and the Cup of everlasting Salvation ". + +The word Altar, then, tells of the pleading of the Sacrifice of Jesus +Christ. In the words of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to Leo +XIII: "We plead and represent before the Father the Sacrifice of the +Cross"; or in the words of Charles Wesley: "To God it is an {87} Altar +whereon men mystically present unto Him the same Sacrifice, as still +suing for mercy"; or, in the words of Isaac Barrow: "Our Lord hath +offered a well-pleasing Sacrifice for our sins, and doth, at God's +right hand, continually renew it by presenting it unto God, and +interceding with Him for the effect thereof". + +The Sacrifice does not, of course, consist in the re-slaying of the +Lamb, but in the offering of the Lamb as it had been slain. It is not +the repetition of the Atonement, but the representation of the +Atonement.[8] We offer on the earthly Altar the same Sacrifice that is +being perpetually offered on the Heavenly Altar. There is only one +Altar, only one Sacrifice, one Eucharist--"one offering, single and +complete". All the combined earthly Altars are but one Altar--the +earthly or visible part of the Heavenly Altar on which He, both Priest +and Victim, offers Himself as the Lamb "as it had been slain". The +Heavenly Altar is, as it were, the centre, and all the earthly Altars +the circumference. We gaze at the Heavenly Altar through the Earthly +Altars. We plead what He pleads; we offer what He offers. + +{88} + + Thus the Church, with exultation, + Till her Lord returns again, + Shows His Death; His mediation + Validates her worship then, + Pleading the Divine Oblation + Offered on the Cross for men. + + +And we must remember that in this offering the whole Three Persons in +the Blessed Trinity are at work. We must not in our worship so +concentrate our attention upon the Second Person, as to exclude the +other Persons from our thoughts. Indeed, if one Person is more +prominent than another, it is God the Father. It is to God the Father +that the Sacrifice ascends; it is with Him that we plead on earth that +which God the Son is pleading in Heaven; it is God the Holy Ghost Who +makes our pleadings possible, Who turns the many Jewish Altars into the +one Christian Altar. The _Gloria in Excelsis_ bids us render worship +to all three Persons engaged in this single act. + + + +_The Table_. + +The second aspect under consideration is suggested by the word +_Table_--the "Holy Table," as St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Athanasius +call it; "the tremendous Table," or the "Mystic {89} Table," as St. +Chrysostom calls it; "the Lord's Table," or "this Thy Table," as, +following the Easterns, our Prayer Book calls it. + +This term emphasizes the Feast-aspect, as "Altar" underlines the +Sacrificial aspect, of the Sacrament. In the "Lord's Supper" we feast +upon the Sacrifice which has already been offered upon the Altar. +"This Thy Table," tells of the Banquet of the Lamb. As St. Thomas puts +it:-- + + He gave Himself in either kind, + His precious Flesh, His precious Blood: + In Love's own fullness thus designed + Of the whole man to be the Food. + + +Or, as Dr. Doddridge puts it, in his Sacramental Ave:-- + + Hail! Sacred Feast, which Jesus makes! + Rich Banquet of His Flesh and Blood! + Thrice happy he, who here partakes + That Sacred Stream, that Heavenly Food. + + +This is the Prayer-Book aspect, which deals with the "_Administration_ +of the Lord's Supper"; which bids us "feed upon Him (not it) in our +hearts by faith," and not by sight; which speaks of the elements as +God's "creatures of Bread and Wine"; which prays, in language of awful +solemnity, that we may worthily "eat His Flesh {90} and drink His +Blood". This is the aspect which speaks of the "means whereby" Christ +communicates Himself to us, implants within us His character, His +virtues, His will;--makes us one with Him, and Himself one with us. By +Sacramental Communion, we "dwell in Him, and He in us"; and this, not +merely as a lovely sentiment, or by means of some beautiful meditation, +but by the real communion of Christ--present without us, and +communicated to us, through the ordained channels. + +Hence, in the Blessed Sacrament, Jesus is for ever counteracting within +us the effects of the Fall. If the first Adam ruined us through food, +the second Adam will reinstate us through food--and that food nothing +less than Himself. "Feed upon _Him_." But how is all this brought +about? + + + +(III) HOW IT DOES IT. + +Once again, nobody knows. The Holy Ghost is the operative power, but +the operation is overshadowed as by the wings of the Dove. It is +enough for us to know what is done, without questioning as to how it is +done. It is enough for us to worship Him in what He does, without {91} +straining to know how He does it--being fully persuaded that, what He +has promised, He is able also to perform.[9] Here, again, we are in +the region of faith, not sight; and reason tells us that faith must be +supreme in its own province. For us, it is enough to say with Queen +Elizabeth:-- + + _He was the Word that spake it;_ + _He took the bread and break it;_ + _And what that Word did make it,_ + _I do believe and take it._[10] + + + +[1] _Leitos_, public, _ergon_, work. + +[2] Either when the service is over, or when those not admissible to +Communion are dismissed. The "Masses" condemned in the thirty-first +Article involved the heresy that Christ was therein offered again by +the Mass Priest to buy souls out of Purgatory at so much per Mass. + +[3] E.g. St. Luke xxii. 17. "He took the cup, and eucharized," i.e. +gave thanks. + +[4] _Accedit verium ad elementum, et fit Sacramentum_ (St. Augustine). + +[5] This definition is really given up now by the best Roman Catholic +theologians. The theory on which Transubstantiation alone is based +(viz. that "substance" is something which exists apart from the +totality of the accidents whereby it is known to us), has now been +generally abandoned. Now, it is universally allowed that "substance is +only a collective name for the sum of all the qualities of matter, +size, colour, weight, taste, and so forth". But, as all these +qualities of bread and wine admittedly remain after consecration, the +substance of the bread and wine must remain too. + +The doctrine of Transubstantiation condemned in Article 22, was that of +a material Transubstantiation which taught (and was taught _ex +Cathedra_ by Pope Nicholas II) that Christ's Body was sensibly touched +and broken by the teeth. + +[6] "The Altar has respect unto the oblation, the Table to the +participation" (Bishop Cosin). + +[7] Cf. Jeremy Taylor's "Holy Living," chap. iv. s. 10. + +[8] Cf. Bright's "Ancient Collects," p. 144. + +[9] Rom. iv. 21. + +[10] "These lines," says Malcolm MacColl in his book on "The +Reformation Settlement" (p. 34), "have sometimes been attributed to +Donne; but the balance of evidence is in favour of their Elizabethan +authorship when the Queen was in confinement as Princess Elizabeth. +They are not in the first edition of Donne, and were published for the +first time as his in 1634, thirteen years after his death." + + + + +{92} + +CHAPTER VII. + +THE LESSER SACRAMENTS. + +These are "those five" which the Article says are "commonly called +Sacraments":[1] Confirmation, Matrimony, Orders, Penance, Unction. +They are called "Lesser" Sacraments to distinguish them from the two +pre-eminent or "Greater Sacraments," Baptism and the Supper of the +Lord.[2] These, though they have not all a "like nature" with the +Greater Sacraments, are selected by the Church as meeting the main +needs of her children between Baptism and Burial. + +They may, for our purpose, be classified in three groups:-- + +(I) _The Sacrament of Completion_ (Confirmation, which completes the +Sacrament of Baptism). + +{93} + +(II) The Sacraments of Perpetuation (Holy Matrimony, which perpetuates +the human race; and Holy Order, which perpetuates the Christian +Ministry). + +(III) The Sacraments of Recovery (Penance, which recovers the sick soul +together with the body; and Unction, which recovers the sick body +together with the soul). + +And, first, The Sacrament of Completion: Confirmation. + + + +[1] Article XXV. + +[2] The Homily on the Sacraments calls them the "other +Sacraments"--i.e. in addition to Baptism and the Eucharist. + + + + +{94} + +CHAPTER VIII. + +CONFIRMATION. + + (I) What it is not. + (II) What it is. + (III) Whom it is for. + (IV) What is essential. + + +(I) WHAT IT IS NOT. + +Confirmation is not the renewal of vows. The renewal of vows is the +final part of the _preparation_ for Confirmation. It is that part of +the preparation which takes place in public, as the previous +preparation has taken place in private. Before Confirmation, the +Baptismal vows are renewed "openly before the Church". Their renewal +is the last word of preparation. The Bishop, or Chief Shepherd, +assures himself by question, and answer, that the Candidate openly +responds to the preparation he has received in {95} private from the +Parish Priest, or under-Shepherd. Before the last revision of the +Prayer Book, the Bishop asked the Candidates in public many questions +from the Catechism before confirming them; now he only asks one--and +the "I do," by which the Candidate renews his Baptismal vows, is the +answer to that preparatory question. + +It is still quite a common idea, even among Church people, that +Confirmation is something which the Candidate does for himself, instead +of something which God does to him. This is often due to the +unfortunate use of the word "confirm"[1] in the Bishop's question. At +the time it was inserted, the word "confirm" meant "confess,"[2] and +referred, not to the Gift of Confirmation, but to the Candidate's +public Confession of faith, before receiving the Sacrament of +Confirmation. It had nothing whatever to do with Confirmation itself. +We must not, then, confuse the preparation for Confirmation with the +Gift of Confirmation. The Sacrament itself is God's gift to the child +bestowed through the Bishop in accordance with the teaching given to +{96} the God-parents at the child's Baptism: "Ye are to take care that +this child be brought to the Bishop _to be_ confirmed _by him_".[3] + +And this leads us to our second point: What Confirmation is. + + + +(II) WHAT IT IS. + +Confirmation is the completion of Baptism. It completes what Baptism +began. In the words of our Confirmation Service, it "increases and +multiplies"--i.e. strengthens or confirms Baptismal grace. It is the +ordained channel which conveys to the Baptized the "sevenfold" (i.e. +complete) gift of the Holy Ghost, which was initially received in +Baptism. + +And this will help us to answer a question frequently asked: "If I have +been confirmed, but not Baptized, must I be Baptized?" Surely, Baptism +must _precede_ Confirmation. If {97} Confirmation increases the grace +given in Baptism, that grace must have been received before it can be +increased. "And must I be 'confirmed again,' as it is said, after +Baptism?" Surely. If I had not been Baptized _before_ I presented +myself for Confirmation, I have not confirmed at all. My Baptism will +now allow me to "be presented to the Bishop once again to be confirmed +by him"--and this time in reality. "Did I, then, receive no grace when +I was presented to the Bishop to be confirmed by him before?" Much +grace, surely, but not the special grace attached to the special +Sacrament of Confirmation, and guaranteed to the Confirmed. Special +channels convey special grace. God's love overflows its channels; what +God gives, or withholds, outside those channels, it would be an +impertinence for us to say. + +Again, Confirmation is, in a secondary sense, a Sacrament of +Admittance. It admits the Baptized to Holy Communion. Two rubrics +teach this. "It is expedient," says the rubric after an adult Baptism, +"that every person thus Baptized should be confirmed by the Bishop so +soon after his Baptism as conveniently may be; that _so he may be +admitted to the Holy Communion_." "And {98} there shall none _be +admitted to Holy Communion_," adds the rubric after Confirmation, +"until such time as he be confirmed, or be ready and desirous to be +confirmed." For "Confirmation, or the laying on of hands," fully +admits the Baptized to that "Royal Priesthood" of the Laity,[4] of +which the specially ordained Priest is ordained to be the +representative. The Holy Sacrifice is the offering of the _whole_ +Church, the universal Priesthood, not merely of the individual Priest +who is the offerer. Thus, the Confirmed can take their part in the +offering, and can assist at it, in union with the ordained Priest who +is actually celebrating. They can say their _Amen_ at the Eucharist, +or "giving of thanks," and give their responding assent to what he is +doing in their name, and on their behalf. + +And this answers another question. "If I am a Communicant, but have +not been confirmed, ought I to present myself for Confirmation?" +Surely. The Prayer Book is quite definite about this. First, it +legislates for the normal case, then for the abnormal. First it says: +"None shall be admitted to Holy Communion until such time as they have +been Confirmed". Then it deals with {99} exceptional cases, and adds, +"or be willing and desirous to be confirmed". Such exceptional cases +may, and do, occur; but even these may not be Communicated unless they +are both "ready" and "desirous" to be confirmed, as soon as +Confirmation can be received. So does the Church safeguard her +Sacraments, and her children. + +"But would you," it is asked, "exclude a Dissenter from Communion, +however good and holy he may be, merely because he has not been +Confirmed?" He certainly would have very little respect for me if I +did not. If, for instance, he belonged to the Methodist Society, he +would assuredly not admit me to be a "Communicant" in that Society. +"No person," says his rule, "shall be suffered on any pretence to +partake of the Lord's Supper _unless he be a member of the Society_, or +receive a note of admission from the Superintendent, which note must be +renewed quarterly." And, again: "That the Table of the Lord should be +open to all comers, is surely a great discredit, and a serious peril to +any Church".[5] And yet the Church, the Divine Society, established by +Jesus Christ Himself, is blamed, and called narrow and {100} bigoted, +if she asserts her own rule, and refuses to admit "all comers" to the +Altar. To give way on such a point would be to forfeit, and rightly to +forfeit, the respect of any law-abiding people, and would be--in many +cases, is--"a great discredit, and a serious peril" to the Church. We +have few enough rules as it is, and if those that we have are +meaningless, we may well be held up to derision. The Prayer Book makes +no provision whatever for those who are not Confirmed, and who, if able +to receive Confirmation, are neither "ready nor desirous to be +Confirmed". + + + +(III) WHOM IT IS FOR. + +Confirmation is for the Baptized, and none other. The Prayer-Book +Title to the service is plain. It calls Confirmation the "laying on of +Hands upon _those that are baptized_," and, it adds, "are come to years +of discretion". + +First, then, Confirmation is for the Baptized, and never for the +unbaptized. + +Secondly, it is (as now administered[6]) for {101} "those who have come +to years of discretion," i.e. for those who are fit for it. As we pray +in the Ember Collect that the Bishop may select "fit persons for the +Sacred Ministry" of the special Priesthood, and may "lay hands suddenly +on no man," so it is with Confirmation or the "laying on of hands" for +the Royal Priesthood. The Bishop must be assured by the Priest who +presents them (and who acts as his examining Chaplain), that they are +"fit persons" to be confirmed. + +And this fitness must be of two kinds: moral and intellectual. It must +be _moral_. The candidate must "have come to years of discretion," +i.e. he must "know to refuse the evil and choose the good".[7] This +"age of discretion," or _competent age_, as the Catechism Rubric calls +it, is not a question of years, but of character. Our present Prayer +Book makes no allusion to any definite span of years whatever, and to +make the magic age of fifteen the minimum universal age for Candidates +is wholly illegal. At the Reformation, the English Church fixed seven +as the age for Confirmation, but our 1662 Prayer Book is more +primitive, and, taking a common-sense view, {102} leaves each case of +moral fitness to be decided on its own merits. The moral standard must +be an individual standard, and must be left, first, to the parent, who +presents the child to the Priest to be prepared; then, to the Priest +who prepares the child for Confirmation, and presents him to the +Bishop; and, lastly, to the Bishop, who must finally decide, upon the +combined testimony of the Priest and parent--and, if in doubt, upon his +own personal examination. + +The _intellectual_ standard is laid down in the Service for the "Public +Baptism of Infants": "So soon as he can say the Creed, the Lord's +Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, in the vulgar (i.e. his native) +tongue, and be further instructed, etc." Here, the words "can say" +obviously mean can say _intelligently_. The mere saying of the words +by rote is comparatively unimportant, though it has its use; but if +this were all, it would degrade the Candidate's intellectual status to +the capacities of a parrot. But, "as soon as" he can intelligently +comply with the Church's requirements, as soon as he has reached "a +competent age," any child may "be presented to the Bishop to be +confirmed by him". + +{103} + +And, in the majority of cases, in these days, "the sooner, the better". +It is, speaking generally, far safer to have the "child" prepared at +home--if it is a Christian home--and confirmed from home, than to risk +the preparation to the chance teaching of a Public School. With +splendid exceptions, School Confirmation is apt to get confused with +the school curriculum and school lessons. It is a sort of "extra +tuition," which, not infrequently, interferes with games or work, +without any compensating advantages in Church teaching. + + + +(IV) WHAT IS ESSENTIAL. + +"The Laying on of Hands"--and nothing else. This act of ritual (so +familiar to the Early Church, from Christ's act in blessing little +children) was used by the Apostles,[8] and is still used by their +successors, the Bishops. It is the only act essential to a valid +Confirmation. + +Other, and suggestive, ceremonies have been in use in different ages, +and in different parts of the Church: but they are supplementary, not +essential. Thus, in the sub-apostolic age, ritual {104} acts expressed +very beautifully the early names for Confirmation, just as "the laying +on of Hands" still expresses the name which in the English Church +proclaims the essence of the Sacrament. + +For instance, Confirmation is called _The Anointing_,[9] and _The +Sealing_, and in some parts of the Church, the Priest dips his finger +in oil blessed by the Bishop, and signs or seals the child upon the +forehead with the sign of the Cross, thus symbolizing the meaning of +such names. But neither the sealing, nor the anointing, is necessary +for a valid Sacrament. + +Confirmation, then, "rightly and duly" administered, completes the +grace given to a child at the outset of its Christian career. It +admits the child to full membership and to full privileges in the +Christian Church. It is the ordained Channel by which the Bishop is +commissioned to convey and guarantee the special grace attached {105} +to, and only to, the Lesser Sacrament of Confirmation.[10] + + + +[1] "Ratifying and _confirming_ the same in your own persons." + +[2] The word was "confess" in 1549. + +[3] The Greek Catechism of Plato, Metropolitan of Moscow, puts it very +clearly: "Through this holy Ordinance _the Holy Ghost descendeth upon +the person Baptized_, and confirmeth him in the grace which he received +in his Baptism according to the example of His descending upon the +disciples of Jesus Christ, and in imitation of the disciples +themselves, who after Baptism laid their hands upon the believers; by +which laying on of hands the Holy Ghost was conferred". + +[4] 1 St. Peter ii. 9. + +[5] Minutes of Wesleyan Conference, 1889, p. 412. + +[6] In the first ages, and, indeed, until the fifteenth century, +Confirmation followed immediately after Baptism, both in East and West, +as it still does in the East. + +[7] Is. vii. 16. + +[8] Acts viii. 12-17; Acts xix. 5, 6. + +[9] In an old seventh century Service, used in the Church of England +down to the Reformation, the Priest is directed: "Here he is to put the +Chrism (oil) on the forehead of the man, and say, 'Receive the sign of +the Holy Cross, by the Chrism of Salvation in Jesus Christ unto Eternal +Life. Amen.'" + +[10] The teaching of our Church of England, passing on the teaching of +the Church Universal, is very happily summed up in an ancient Homily of +the Church of England. It runs thus: "In Baptism the Christian was +born again spiritually, to live; in Confirmation he is made bold to +fight. There he received remission of sin; here he receiveth increase +of grace.... In Baptism he was chosen to be God's son; in Confirmation +God shall give him His Holy Spirit to ... perfect him. In Baptism he +was called and chosen to be one of God's soldiers, and had his white +coat of innocency given him, and also his badge, which was the red +cross set upon his forehead...; in Confirmation he is encouraged to +fight, and to take the armour of God put upon him, which be able to +bear off the fiery darts of the devil." + + + + +{106} + +CHAPTER IX. + +HOLY MATRIMONY. + +We have called Holy Matrimony the "_Sacrament of Perpetuation_," for it +is the ordained way in which the human race is to be perpetuated. + +Matrimony is the legal union between two persons,--a union which is +created by mutual consent: Holy Matrimony is that union sanctioned and +sanctified by the Church. + +There are three familiar names given to this union: Matrimony, +Marriage, Wedlock. + +Matrimony, derived from _mater_, a mother, tells of the woman's (i.e. +wife-man's) "joy that a man is born into the world". Marriage, derived +from _maritus_, a husband (or house-dweller[1]), tells of the man's +place in the "hus" or house. Wedlock, derived from _weddian_, a +pledge, reminds both man and woman of the life-long pledge which each +has made "either to other". + +{107} + +It is this Sacrament of Matrimony, Marriage, or Wedlock, that we are +now to consider. We will think of it under four headings:-- + + (I) What is it for? + (II) What is its essence? + (III) Whom is it for? + (IV) What are its safeguards? + + + +(I) WHAT IS IT FOR? + +Marriage is, as we have seen, God's method of propagating the human +race. It does this in two ways--by expansion, and by limitation. This +is seen in the New Testament ordinance, "one man for one woman". It +expands the race, but within due and disciplined limitations. +Expansion, without limitation, would produce quantity without quality, +and would wreck the human race; limitation without expansion might +produce quality without quantity, but would extinguish the human race. +Like every other gift of God, marriage is to be treated "soberly, +wisely, discretely," and, like every other gift, it must be used with a +due combination of freedom and restraint. + +Hence, among other reasons, the marriage union between one man and one +woman is {108} indissoluble. For marriage is not a mere union of +sentiment; it is not a mere terminable contract between two persons, +who have agreed to live together as long as they suit each other. It +is an _organic_ not an emotional union; "They twain shall be one +flesh," which nothing but death can divide. No law in Church or State +can unmarry the legally married. A State may _declare_ the +non-existence of the marriage union, just as it may _declare_ the +non-existence of God: but such a declaration does not affect the fact, +either in one case or the other. + +In England the State does, in certain cases, declare that the life-long +union is a temporary contract, and does permit "this man" or "this +woman" to live with another man, or with another woman, and, if they +choose, even to exchange husbands or wives. This is allowed by the +Divorce Act of 1857,[2] "when," writes Bishop Stubbs, "the calamitous +legislation of 1857 inflicted on English Society and English morals +{109} the most cruel blow that any conjunction of unrighteous influence +could possibly have contrived".[3] + +The Church has made no such declaration. It rigidly forbids a husband +or wife to marry again during the lifetime of either party. The Law of +the Church remains the Law of the Church, overridden--but not repealed. +This has led to a conflict between Church and State in a country where +they are, in theory though not in fact, united. But this is the fault +of the State, not of the Church. It is a case in which a junior +partner has acted without the consent of, or rather in direct +opposition to, the senior partner. Historically and chronologically +speaking, the Church (the senior partner) took the State (the junior +partner) into partnership, and the State, in spite of all the benefits +it has received from the Church, has taken all it could get, and has +thrown the Church over to legalize sin. It has ignored its senior +partner, and loosened the old historical bond between the two. This +the Church cannot help, and this the State fully admits, legally +absolving the Church from taking any part in its mock re-marriages. + + + +{110} + +(II) WHAT IS ITS ESSENCE? + +The essence of matrimony is "mutual consent". The essential part of +the Sacrament consists in the words: "I, M., take thee, N.," etc. +Nothing else is essential, though much else is desirable. Thus, +marriage in a church, however historical and desirable, is not +_essential_ to the validity of a marriage. Marriage at a Registry +Office (i.e. mutual consent in the presence of the Registrar) is every +bit as legally indissoluble as marriage in a church. The not uncommon +argument: "I was only married in a Registry Office, and can therefore +take advantage of the Divorce Act," is fallacious _ab initio_.[4] + +Why, then, be married in, and by the Church? Apart from the history +and sentiment, for this reason. The Church is the ordained channel +through which grace to keep the marriage vow is bestowed. A special +and _guaranteed_ grace is {111} attached to a marriage sanctioned and +blest by the Church. The Church, in the name of God, "consecrates +matrimony," and from the earliest times has given its sanction and +blessing to the mutual consent. We are reminded of this in the +question: "Who _giveth_ this woman to be married to this man?" In +answer to the question, the Parent, or Guardian, presents the Bride to +the Priest (the Church's representative), who, in turn, presents her to +the Bridegroom, and blesses their union. In the Primitive Church, +notice of marriage had to be given to the Bishop of the Diocese, or his +representative,[5] in order that due inquiries might be made as to the +fitness of the persons, and the Church's sanction given or withheld. +After this notice, a special service of _Betrothal_ (as well as the +actual marriage service) was solemnized. + +These two separate services are still marked off from each other in +(though both forming a part of) our present marriage service. The +first part of the service is held outside the chancel gates, and +corresponds to the old service of _Betrothal_. Here, too, the actual +ceremony of "mutual consent" now takes place--that part of {112} the +ceremony which would be equally valid in a Registry Office. Then +follows the second part of the service, in which the Church gives her +blessing upon the marriage. And because this part is, properly +speaking, part of the Eucharistic Office, the Bride and Bridegroom now +go to the Altar with the Priest, and there receive the Church's +Benediction, and--ideally--their first Communion after marriage. So +does the Church provide grace for her children that they may "perform +the vows they have made unto the King". The late hour for modern +weddings, and the consequent postponement[6] of Communion, has obscured +much of the meaning of the service; but a nine o'clock wedding, in +which the married couple receive the Holy Communion, followed by the +wedding breakfast, is, happily, becoming more common, and is restoring +to us one of the best of old English customs. It is easy enough to +slight old religious forms and ceremonies; but is anyone one atom +better, or happier for having neglected them? + + + +{113} + +(III) WHOM IS IT FOR? + +Marriage is for three classes:-- + +(1) The unmarried--i.e. those who have never been married, or whose +marriage is (legally) dissolved by death. + +(2) The non-related--i.e. either by consanguinity (by blood), or +affinity (by marriage). + +(3) The full-aged. + + + +(1) _The Unmarried_. + +Obviously, marriage is only for the unmarried. But, is not this very +hard upon those whose marriage has been a mistake, and who have been +divorced by the State? And, above all, is it not very hard upon the +innocent party, who has been granted a divorce? It is very hard, so +hard, so terribly hard, that only those who have to deal personally, +and practically, with concrete cases, can guess how hard--hard enough +often on the guilty party, and harder still on the innocent. "God +knows" it is hard, and will make it as easy as God Himself can make it, +if only self-surrender is placed before self-indulgence. But the +alternative is still harder. We sometimes forget that legislation for +the individual may bear even harder {114} on the masses, than +legislation for the masses may bear upon the individual. And, after +all, this is not a question of "hard _versus_ easy," but of "right +_versus_ wrong". Moreover, as we are finding out, that which seems +easiest at the moment, often turns out hardest in the long run. It is +no longer contended that re-marriage after a State-divorce is that +universal Elysium which it has always been confidently assumed to be. + +There is, too, a positively absurd side to the present conflict between +Church and State. Here is a case in point. Some time ago, a young +girl married a man about whom she knew next to nothing, the man telling +her that marriage was only a temporary affair, and that, if it did not +answer, the State would divorce them. It did not answer. Wrong-doing +ensued, and a divorce was obtained. Then the girl entered into a +State-marriage with another man. But that answered no better. A +divorce was again applied for, but this time was refused. Eventually, +the girl left her State-made husband, and ran away with her real +husband. In other words, she eloped with her own husband. But what is +her position to-day? In the eyes of the State, she is now living with +a man who is not {115} her husband. Her State-husband is still alive, +and can apply, at any moment, for an order for the restitution of +conjugal rights--however unlikely he is to get it. Further, if in the +future she has any children by her real husband (unless she has been +married again to him, after divorce from her State-husband) these +children will be illegitimate. This is the sort of muddle the Divorce +Act has got us into. One course, and only one course, is open to the +Church--to disentangle itself from all question of extending the powers +of the Act on grounds of inequality, or any other real (and sometimes +very real) or fancied hardship, and to consistently fight for the +repeal of the Act. This, it will be said, is _Utopian_. Exactly! It +is the business of the Church to aim at the Utopian. Her whole history +shows that she is safest, as well as most successful, when aiming at +what the world derides. + +One question remains: Is not the present Divorce Law "one law for the +rich and another for the poor"? Beyond all question. This is its sole +merit, if merit it can have. It does, at least, partially protect the +poor from sin-made-easy--a condition which money has bought for the +rich. If the State abrogated the Sixth {116} Commandment for the rich, +and made it lawful for a rich man to commit murder, it would at least +be no demerit if it refused to extend the permit to the poor. + + + +(2) _The Non-Related_. + +But, secondly, marriage is for the non-related--non-related, that is, +in two ways, by Consanguinity, and Affinity. + +(_a_) By _Consanguinity_. Consanguinity is of two kinds, lineal and +collateral. _Lineal_ Consanguinity[7] is blood relationship "in a +_direct_ line," i.e. from a common ancestor. _Collateral_ +Consanguinity is blood relationship from a common ancestor, but not in +a direct line. + +The law of Consanguinity has not, at the present moment, been attacked, +and is still the law of the land. + +(_b_) By _Affinity_. Affinity[8] is near relationship by marriage. It +is of three kinds: (1) _Direct_, i.e. between a husband and his wife's +blood relations, and between a wife and her husband's blood relations; +(2) _Secondary_, i.e. between a husband {117} and his wife's relations +by marriage; (3) _Collateral_, i.e. between a husband and the relations +of his wife's relations. In case of Affinity, the State has broken +faith with the Church without scruple, and the _Deceased Wife's Sister +Bill_[9] is the result. So has it + + brought confusion to the Table round. + + +The question is sometimes asked, whether the State can alter the +Church's law without her consent. An affirmative answer would reduce +whatever union still remains between them to its lowest possible term, +and would place the Church in a position which no Nonconformist body +would tolerate for a day. The further question, as to whether the +State can order the Church to Communicate persons who have openly and +deliberately broken her laws, needs no discussion. No thinking person +seriously contends that it can. + + + +(3) _For the Full-Aged_. + +No boy under 14, and no girl under 12, can contract a legal marriage +either with, or without the consent of Parents or Guardians. No man +{118} or woman under 21 can do so against the consent of Parents or +Guardians. + + + +(IV) WHAT ARE ITS SAFEGUARDS? + +These are, mainly, two: _Banns_ and _Licences_--both intended to secure +the best safeguard of all, _publicity_. This publicity is secured, +first, by Banns. + + +(1) _Banns_. + +The word is the plural form of _Ban_, "a proclamation". The object of +this proclamation is to "ban" an improper marriage. + +In the case of marriage after Banns, in order to secure publicity:-- + +(1) Each party must reside[10] for twenty-one days in the parish where +the Banns are being published. + +(2) The marriage must be celebrated in one of the two parishes in which +the Banns have been published. + +{119} + +(3) Seven days' previous notice of publication must be given to the +clergy by whom the Banns are to be published--though the clergy may +remit this length of notice if they choose. + +(4) The Banns must be published on three separate (though not +necessarily successive) Sundays. + +(5) Before the marriage, a certificate of publication must be presented +to the officiating clergyman, from the clergyman of the other parish in +which the Banns were published. + +(6) Banns only hold good for three months. After this period, they +must be again published three times before the marriage can take place. + +(7) Banns may be forbidden on four grounds: If either party is married +already; or is related by consanguinity or affinity; or is under age; +or is insane. + +(8) Banns published in false names invalidate a marriage, if both +parties are cognisant of the fact before the marriage takes place, i.e. +if they wilfully intend to defeat the law, but not otherwise. + + +(2) Licences. + +There are two kinds of Marriage Licence, an Ordinary, or Common +Licence, and a Special Licence. + +{120} + +An _Ordinary Licence_, costing about L2, is granted by the Bishop, or +Ordinary, in lieu of Banns, either through his Chancellor, or a +"Surrogate," i.e. substitute. In marriage by Licence, three points may +be noticed:-- + +(1) One (though only one) of the parties must reside in the parish +where the marriage is to be celebrated, for fifteen days previous to +the marriage. + +(2) One of the parties must apply for the Licence in person, not in +writing. + +(3) A licence only holds good for three months. + +A _Special Licence_, costing about L30, can only be obtained from the +Archbishop of Canterbury,[11] and is only granted after special and +minute inquiry. The points here to notice are:-- + +(1) Neither party need reside in the parish where the marriage is to be +solemnized. + +(2) The marriage may be celebrated in any Church, whether licensed or +unlicensed[12] for marriages. + +(3) It may be celebrated at any time of the day. It may be added that +if any clergyman {121} celebrates a marriage without either Banns or +Licence (or upon a Registrar's Certificate), he commits a felony, and +is liable to fourteen years' penal servitude.[13] + +Other safeguards there are, such as:-- + +_The Time for Marriages_.--Marriages must not be celebrated before 8 +A.M., or after 3 P.M., so as to provide a reasonable chance of +publicity. + +_The Witnesses to a Marriage_.--Two witnesses, at least, must be +present, in addition to the officiating clergyman. + +_The Marriage Registers_.--The officiating clergyman must enter the +marriage in two Registers provided by the State. + +_The Signing of the Registers_.--The bride and bridegroom must sign +their names in the said Registers immediately after the ceremony, as +well as the two witnesses and the officiating clergyman. If either +party wilfully makes any false statement with regard to age, condition, +etc., he or she is guilty of perjury. + +Such are some of the wise safeguards provided by both Church and State +for the Sacrament of Marriage. Their object is to prevent the {122} +marriage state being entered into "lightly, unadvisedly, or wantonly," +to secure such publicity as will prevent clandestine marriages,[14] and +will give parents, and others with legal status, an opportunity to +lodge legal objections. + +Great is the solemnity of the Sacrament in which is "signified and +represented the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and His Church". + + + +[1] Husband--from _hus_, a house, and _buan_, to dwell. + +[2] Until fifty-three years ago an Act of Parliament was necessary for +a divorce. In 1857 _The Matrimonial Causes Act_ established the +Divorce Court. In 1873 the _Indicature Act_ transferred it to a +division of the High Court--the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty +Division. + +[3] "Visitation Charges," p. 252. + +[4] It is a common legal error that seven years effective separation +between husband and wife entitles either to remarry, and hundreds of +women who have lost sight of their husbands for seven years innocently +commit bigamy. Probably the mistake comes from the fact that +_prosecution_ for bigamy does not hold good in such a case. But this +does not legalize the bigamous marriage or legitimize the children. + +[5] The origin of Banns. + +[6] The Rubric says: "It is convenient that the new-married persons +receive the Holy Communion _at the time of their marriage_, or at the +first opportunity after their marriage," thus retaining, though +releasing, the old rule. + +[7] Consanguinity--from _cum_, together, and _sanguineus_, relating to +blood. + +[8] Affinity--from _ad_, near, and _finis_, a boundary. + +[9] See a most helpful paper read by Father Puller at the E.C.U. +Anniversary Meeting, and reported in "The Church Times" of 17 June, +1910. + +[10] There seems to be no legal definition of the word "reside". The +law would probably require more than leaving a bag in a room, hired for +twenty-one days, as is often done. It must be remembered that the +object of the law is _publicity_--that is, the avoidance of a +clandestine marriage, which marriage at a Registry Office now +frequently makes so fatally easy. + +[11] 25 Hen. VIII, cap. 21. + +[12] Such as, for example, Royal Chapels, St. Paul's Cathedral, Eton +College Chapel, etc. + +[13] Cf. Blunt's "Church Law," p. 133; 4 Geo. IV, c. 76, s. 21. + +[14] It will be remembered that runaway marriages were, in former days, +frequently celebrated at Gretna Green, a Scotch village in +Dumfriesshire, near the English border. + + + + +{123} + +CHAPTER X. + +HOLY ORDER. + +The Second Sacrament of Perpetuation is Holy Order. As the Sacrament +of Marriage perpetuates the human race, so the Sacrament of Order +perpetuates the Priesthood. Holy Order, indeed, perpetuates the +Sacraments themselves. It is the ordained channel through which the +Sacramental life of the Church is continued. + +Holy Order, then, was instituted for the perpetuation of those +Sacraments which depend upon Apostolic Succession. It makes it +possible for the Christian laity to be Confirmed, Communicated, +Absolved. Thus, the Christian Ministry is a great deal more than a +body of men, chosen as officers might be chosen in the army or navy. +It is the Church's media for the administration of the Sacraments of +Salvation. To say this does not assert that God cannot, and does not, +save and sanctify souls in any other way; but it does assert, as +Scripture does, that the {124} Christian Ministry is the authorized and +ordained way. + + + +The Threefold Ministry. + +In this Ministry, there are three orders, or degrees: Bishops, Priests, +and Deacons. In the words of the Prayer Book: "It is evident unto all +men, diligently reading Holy Scripture and ancient Authors, that, from +the Apostles' time, there have been these Orders of Ministers in +Christ's Church; Bishops, Priests, and Deacons".[1] + + + +(I) BISHOPS. + +Who was the first Bishop? Jesus Christ, "the Shepherd and Bishop of +our souls". When, and where, was the first Ordination? In the Upper +Chamber, when He, the Universal Bishop, Himself ordained the first +Apostles. When was {125} the second Ordination? When these Apostles +ordained Matthias to succeed Judas. This was the first link in the +chain of Apostolic Succession. What followed? In apostolic days, +Timothy was ordained, with episcopal jurisdiction over Ephesus; Titus, +over Crete; Polycarp (the friend of St. John), over Smyrna; and then, +later on, Linus, over Rome. And so the great College of Bishops +expands until, in the second century, we read in a well-known writer, +St. Irenaeus: "We can reckon up lists of Bishops ordained in the +Churches from the Apostles to our time". Link after link, the chain of +succession lengthens "throughout all the world," until it reaches the +Early British Church, and then, in 597, the English Church, through the +consecration of Augustine,[2] first Archbishop of Canterbury, and in +1903 of Randall Davidson his ninety-fourth successor. + +And this is the history of every ordination in the Church to-day. "It +is through the Apostolic Succession," said the late Bishop Stubbs to +his ordination Candidates, "that I am empowered, through the long line +of mission and Commission {126} from the Upper Chamber at Jerusalem, to +lay my hands upon you and send you."[3] + +How does a Priest become a Bishop? In the Church of England he goes +through four stages:-- + + (1) He is _nominated_ by the Crown. + (2) He is _elected_ by the Church. + (3) His election is _confirmed_ by the Archbishop. + (4) He is _consecrated_ by the Episcopate. + +(1) He is _nominated_ by the Crown. This is in accordance with the +immemorial custom of this realm. In these days, the Prime Minister +(representing the people) proposes the name of a Priest to the King, +who accepts or rejects the recommendation. If he accepts it, the King +nominates the selected Priest to the Church for election, and +authorizes the issue of legal documents for such election. This is +called _Conge d'elire_, "leave to elect". + +(2) He is _elected_ by the Church. The King's {127} nominee now comes +before the Dean and Chapter (representing the Church), and the Church +either elects or rejects him. It has power to do either. If the +nominee is elected, what is called his "Confirmation" follows--that +is:-- + +(3) His election is _confirmed_ by the Archbishop of Canterbury, +according to a right reserved to him by _Magna Charta_. Before +confirming the election, the Archbishop, or his representative, sits in +public, generally at Bow Church, Cheapside, to hear legal objections +from qualified laity against the election. Objections were of late, it +will be remembered, made, and overruled, in the cases of Dr. Temple and +Dr. Gore. Then, if duly nominated, elected, and confirmed,-- + +(4) He is _consecrated_ by the Episcopate. To safeguard the +Succession, three Bishops, at least, are required for the Consecration +of another Bishop, though one would secure a valid Consecration. No +Priest can be Consecrated Bishop under the age of thirty. Very +carefully does the Church safeguard admission to the Episcopate. + + + +{128} + +_Homage._ + +After Consecration, the Bishop "does homage,"[4] i.e. he says that he, +like any other subject (ecclesiastic or layman), is the King's +"_homo_". What does he do homage for? He does homage, not for any +spiritual gift, but for "all the possessions, and profette spirituall +and temporall belongyng to the said ... Bishopricke".[5] The +_temporal_ possessions include such things as his house, revenue, etc. +But what is meant by doing homage for _spiritual_ possessions? Does +not this admit the claim that the King can, as Queen Elizabeth is +reported to have said, make or unmake a Bishop? No. Spiritual +_possessions_ do not here mean spiritual _powers_,--powers which can be +conferred by the Episcopate alone. {129} The "spiritual possessions" +for which a Bishop "does homage" refer to fees connected with spiritual +things, such as Episcopal Licences, Institutions to Benefices, Trials +in the Ecclesiastical Court, Visitations--fees, by the way, which, with +very rare exceptions, do not go into the Bishop's own pocket! + + + +_Jurisdiction._ + +What is meant by Episcopal Jurisdiction? Jurisdiction is of two kinds, +_Habitual_ and _Actual_. + +Habitual Jurisdiction is the Jurisdiction given to a Bishop to exercise +his office in the Church at large. It is conveyed with Consecration, +and is given to the Bishop as a Bishop of the Catholic Church. Thus an +Episcopal act, duly performed, would be valid, however irregular, +outside the Bishop's own Diocese, and in any part of the Church. + +_Actual Jurisdiction_ is this universal Jurisdiction limited to a +particular area, called a Diocese. To this area, a Bishop's right to +exercise his Habitual Jurisdiction is, for purposes of order and +business, confined. + +The next order in the Ministry is the Priesthood. + + + +{130} + +(II) PRIESTS. + +No one can read the Prayer-Book Office for the _Ordering of Priests_ +without being struck by its contrast to the ordinary conception of +Priesthood by the average Englishman. The Bishop's words in the +Ordination Service: "Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of +a Priest in the Church of God," must surely mean more than that a +Priest should try to be a good organizer, a good financier, a good +preacher, or good at games--though the better he is at all these, the +better it may be. But the gift of the Holy Ghost for "the Office and +Work of a Priest" must mean more than this. + +We may consider it in connexion with four familiar English clerical +titles: _Priest, Minister, Parson, Clergyman_. + + + +_Priest._ + +According to the Prayer Book, a Priest, or Presbyter, is ordained to do +three things, which he, and he alone, can do: to Absolve, to +Consecrate, to Bless. + +He, and he alone, can _Absolve_. Think! It is the day of his +Ordination to the Priesthood. He is saying Matins as a Deacon just +_before_ his {131} Ordination, and he is forbidden to pronounce the +Absolution: he is saying Evensong just _after_ his Ordination, and he +is ordered to pronounce the Absolution. + +He, and he alone, can _Consecrate_. If a Deacon pretends to Consecrate +the Elements at the Blessed Sacrament, not only is his act sacrilege +and invalid, but even by the law of the land he is liable to a penalty +of L100.[6] + +He, and he alone, can give the _Blessing_--i.e. the Church's official +Blessing. The right of Benediction belongs to him as part of his +Ministerial Office. The Blessing pronounced by a Deacon might be the +personal blessing of a good and holy man, just as the blessing of a +layman--a father blessing his child--might be of value as such. In +each case it would be a personal act. But a Priest does not bless in +his own name, but in the name of the Whole Church. It is an official, +not a personal act: he conveys, not his own, but the Church's blessing +to the people. + +Hence, the valid Ordination of a Priest is of essential importance to +the laity. + +{132} + +But there is another aspect of "the Office and Work of a Priest in the +Church of God". This we see in the word + + + +_Minister._ + +The Priest not only ministers before God on behalf of his people, but +he ministers to his people on behalf of God. In this aspect of the +Priesthood, he ministers God's gifts to the laity. If, as a Priest, he +pleads the One Sacrifice on behalf of the people, as a Minister he +feeds the people upon the one Sacrifice. His chief ministerial duty is +to minister to the people--to give them Baptism, Absolution, Holy +Communion; to minister to all their spiritual needs whenever, and +wherever, he is needed. + +It is, surely, a sad necessity that this ministerial "office and work" +should be so often confused with finance, doles, charities, begging +sermons, committees, etc. In all such things he is, indeed, truly +serving and ministering; but he is often obliged to place them in the +wrong order of importance, and so dim the sight of the laity to his +real position, and not infrequently make his spiritual ministrations +unacceptable. A well-known and London-wide respected Priest said {133} +shortly before he died, that he had almost scattered his congregation +by the constant "begging sermons" which he hated, but which necessity +made imperative. The laity are claiming (and rightly claiming) the +privilege of being Church workers, and are preaching (and rightly +preaching) that "the Clergy are not the Church". If only they would +practise what they preach, and relieve the Clergy of all Church +finance, they need never listen to another "begging sermon" again. So +doing, they would rejoice the heart of the Clergy, and fulfil one of +their true functions as laity. + + + +The Parson. + +This is one of the most beautiful of all the clerical names, only it +has become smirched by common use. + +The word Parson is derived from _Persona_, a _person_. The Parson is +_the_ Person--the Person who represents God in the Parish. It is not +his own person, or position, that he stands for, but the position and +Person of his Master. Like St. Paul, he can say, "I magnify mine +office," and probably the best way to magnify his office will be to +minimize himself. The outward marks of {134} respect still shown to +"the Parson" in some places, are not necessarily shown to the person +himself (though often, thank God, they may be), but are meant, however +unconsciously, to honour the Person he represents--just as the lifting +of the hat to a woman is not, of necessity, a mark of respect to the +individual woman, but a tribute to the Womanhood she represents. + +The Parson, then, is, or should be, the official person, the standing +element in the parish, who reminds men of God. + + + +_Clergyman._ + +The word is derived from the Greek _kleros_,[7] "a lot," and conveys +its own meaning. According to some, it takes us back in thought to the +first Apostolic Ordination, when "they cast _lots_, and the _lot_ fell +upon Matthias". It reminds us that, as Matthias "was numbered with the +eleven," so a "Clergyman" is, at his Ordination, numbered with that +long list of "Clergy" who trace their spiritual pedigree to Apostolic +days. + +{135} + +_Ordination Safeguards._ + +"Seeing then," run the words of the Ordination Service, "into how high +a dignity, and how weighty an Office and Charge" a Priest is called, +certain safeguards surround his Ordination, both for his own sake, and +for the sake of his people. + + + +_Age._ + +No Deacon can, save under very exceptional circumstances, be ordained +Priest before he is 24, and has served at least a year in the Diaconate. + + + +_Fitness._ + +This fitness, as in Confirmation, will be intellectual and moral. His +_intellectual_ fitness is tested by the Bishop's Examining Chaplain +some time before the Ordination to the Priesthood, and, in doubtful +cases, by the Bishop himself. + +His _moral_ fitness is tested by the Publication during Service, in the +Church where he is Deacon, of his intention to offer himself as a +Candidate for the Priesthood. To certify that this has been done, this +Publication must be signed by the Churchwarden, representing the {136} +laity, and by the Incumbent, representing the Clergy and responsible to +the Bishop. + +Further safeguard is secured by letters of Testimony from three +Beneficed Clergy, who have known the Candidate well either for the past +three years, or during the term of his Diaconate. + +Finally, at the very last moment, in the Ordination Service itself, the +Bishop invites the laity, if they know "any impediment or notable +crime" disqualifying the Candidate from being ordained Priest, to "come +forth in the Name of God, and show what the crime or impediment is". + +Why all these safeguards? For many obvious reasons, but specially for +one. Priest's Orders are indelible. + + + +_The Indelibility of Orders._ + +Once a Priest, always a Priest. When once the Bishop has ordained a +Deacon to the Priesthood, there is no going back. The law, +ecclesiastical or civil, may deprive him of the right to _exercise_ his +Office, but no power can deprive him of the Office itself. + +For instance, to safeguard the Church, and for {137} the sake of the +laity, a Priest may, for various offences, be what is commonly called +"unfrocked". He may be degraded, temporarily suspended, or permanently +forbidden to _officiate_ in any part of the Church; but he does not +cease to be a Priest. Any Priestly act, rightly and duly performed, +would be valid, though irregular. It would be for the people's good, +though it would be to his own hurt. + +Again: by _The Clerical Disabilities Act_ of 1870, a Priest may, by the +law of the land, execute a "Deed of Relinquishment," and, as far as the +law is concerned, return to lay life. This would enable him legally to +undertake lay work which the law forbids to the Clergy.[8] + +He may, in consequence, regain his legal rights as a layman, and lose +his legal rights as a Priest; but he does not cease to be a Priest. +The law can only touch his civil status, and cannot touch his priestly +"character". That is indelible. + +Hence, no securities can be superfluous to safeguard the irrevocable. + + + +{138} + +_Jurisdiction._ + +As in the case of the Bishops, a Priest's jurisdiction is +twofold--_habitual_ and _actual_. Ordination confers on him _habitual_ +jurisdiction, i.e. the power to exercise his office, to Absolve, to +Consecrate, to Bless, in the "Holy Church throughout the world". And, +as in the case of Bishops, for purposes of ecclesiastical order and +discipline, this Habitual Jurisdiction is limited to the sphere in +which the Bishop licenses him. "Take thou authority," says the Bishop, +"to preach the word of God, and to minister the Sacraments _in the +congregation where thou shalt be lawfully appointed thereunto_." This +is called _Actual_ Jurisdiction. + + + +_The Essence of the Sacrament._ + +The absolutely essential part of Ordination is the Laying on of Hands +(1 Tim. iv. 14; Acts vi. 6; 2 Tim. i. 6). Various other and beautiful +ceremonies have, at different times, and in different places, +accompanied the essential Rite. Sometimes, and in some parts of the +Church, Unction, or anointing the Candidate with oil, has been used: +sometimes Ordination has been accompanied with the delivery of a Ring, +the Paten {139} and Chalice, the Bible, or the Gospels, the Pastoral +Staff (to a Bishop),--all edifying ceremonies, but not essentials. + + + +(III) DEACONS. + +A Deacon is a server. The word comes from the Greek _diakonos_, a +servant, and exactly describes the Office. Originally, a permanent +Order in the Church, the Diaconate is now, in the Church of England, +generally regarded as a step to the Priesthood. This is a loss. But +it is as this step, or preparatory stage, that we have to consider it. + +Considering the importance of this first step in the Ministry, both to +the man himself, and to the people, it is well that the laity should +know what safeguards are taken by the Bishop to secure "fit persons to +serve in the sacred ministry of the Church"[9]--and should realize +their own great responsibility in the matter. First, there is the age. + + + +(1) _The Age._ + +No layman can be made a Deacon under 23. + + + +{140} + +(2) The Preliminaries. + +The chief preliminary is the selection of the Candidate. The burden of +selection is shared by the Bishop, Clergy and Laity. The Bishop must, +of course, be the final judge of the Candidate's fitness, but _the +evidence upon which he bases his judgment_ must very largely be +supplied by the Laity. + +We pray in the Ember Collect that he "may lay hands suddenly on no man, +but make choice of _fit persons_". It is well that the Laity should +remember that they share with the Bishop and Clergy in the +responsibility of choice. + +For this fitness will, as in the case of the Priest, be moral and +intellectual. + +It will be _moral_--and it is here that the responsibility of the laity +begins. For, in addition to private inquiries made by the Bishop, the +laity are publicly asked, in the church of the parish where the +Candidate resides, to bear testimony to the integrity of his character. +This publication is called the _Si quis_, from the Latin of the first +two words of publication ("if any..."), and it is repeated by the +Bishop in open church in the Ordination Service. The {141} absence of +any legal objection by the laity is the testimony of the people to the +Candidate's fitness. This throws upon the laity a full share of +responsibility in the choice of the Candidate. Their responsibility in +giving evidence is only second to that of the Bishop, whose decision +rests upon the evidence they give. + +Then, there is the testimony of the Clergy. No layman is accepted by +the Bishop for Ordination without _Letters Testimonial_--i.e. the +testimony of three beneficed Clergymen, to whom he is well known. +These Clergy must certify that "we have had opportunity of observing +his conduct, and we do believe him, in our consciences, and as to his +moral conduct, a fit person to be admitted to the Sacred Ministry". +Each signature must be countersigned by the signatory's own Bishop, who +thus guarantees the Clergyman's moral fitness to certify. + +Lastly, comes the Bishop himself, who, from first to last, is in close +touch with the Candidate, and who almost invariably helps to prepare +him personally in his own house during the week before his Ordination. + +It will be _intellectual_. In addition to University testimony, +evidence of the Candidate's {142} intellectual fitness is given to the +Bishop, as in the case of Priests, by his Examining Chaplains. Some +months before the Ordination, the Candidate is examined, and the +Examiner's Report sent in to the Bishop. The standard of intellectual +fitness has differed at various ages, in different parts of the Church, +and no one standard can be laid down. Assuming that the average +proportion of people in a parish will be (on a generous calculation) as +twelve Jurymen to one Judge, the layman called to the Diaconate should, +at least, be equal in intellectual attainment to "the layman" called to +the Bar. + +It does sometimes happen that evidence is given by Clergy, or laity, +which leads the Bishop to reject the Candidate on moral grounds. It +does sometimes happen that the Candidate is rejected or postponed on +intellectual grounds. It does, it must, sometimes happen that mistakes +are made: God alone is infallible. But, if due care is taken, publicly +and privately, and if the laity, as well as the Clergy, do their duty, +the Bishop's risk of a wrong judgment is reduced to a very small +minimum. + +A "fit" Clergy is so much the concern of the laity, that they may well +be reminded of their {143} parts and duties in the Ordination of a +Deacon. For, as Dr. Liddon says, "the strength of the Church does not +consist in the number of pages in its 'Clerical Directory,' but in the +sum total of the moral and spiritual force which she has at her +command". + + + +[1] "The Threefold Ministry," writes Bishop Lightfoot, "can be traced +to Apostolic direction; and, short of an express statement, we can +possess no better assurance of a Divine appointment, or, at least, a +Divine Sanction." And he adds, speaking of his hearty desire for union +with the Dissenters, "we cannot surrender for any immediate advantages +the threefold Ministry which we have inherited from Apostolic times, +and which is the historic backbone of the Church" ("Ep. to the +Philippians," p. 276, later ed.). + +[2] The Welsh Bishops did not transmit Episcopacy to us, but rather +came into us. + +[3] In a book called _Registrum Sacrum Anglicanum_, Bishop Stubbs has +traced the name, date of Consecration, names of Consecrators, and in +most cases place of Consecration, of every Bishop in the Church of +England from the Consecration of Augustine. + +[4] The Bishops are one of the three Estates of the Realm--Lords +Spiritual, Lords Temporal, and Commons (not, as is so often said, King, +Lords, and Commons). The Archbishop of Canterbury is the first Peer of +the Realm, and has precedency immediately after the blood royal. The +Archbishop of York has precedency over all Dukes, not being of royal +blood, and over all the great officers of State, except the Lord +Chancellor. He has the privilege of crowning the Queen Consort. + +[5] Cf. "Encyclopedia of the Laws of England," vol. 11, p. 156; and 25 +Hen. VIII, cap. 2, s. 6. + +[6] 14 Car. II, c. 4, s. 10. See Phillimore's "Ecclesiastical Law," +vol. 1, p. 109. + +[7] But see Skeat, whose references are to [Greek: kleros], "a lot," in +late Greek, and the Clergy whose portion is the Lord (Deut. xviii. 2, 1 +Pet. v. 3, cf. Acts i. 17). The [Greek: kleros] is thus the portion +rather than the circumstance by which it is obtained, i.e. Acts i. 17 +rather than Acts i. 26. + +[8] For example: farming more than a certain number of acres, or going +into Parliament. + +[9] Ember Collect. + + + + +{144} + +CHAPTER XI. + +PENANCE. + +SACRAMENTS OF RECOVERY. + +We deal now with the two last Sacraments under consideration--Penance +and Unction. Both are Sacraments of healing. Penance is for the +healing of the soul, and indirectly of the body: Unction is for the +healing of the body, and indirectly of the soul. + +"Every Sacrament," says St. Thomas Aquinas, "has been instituted to +produce one special effect, although it may produce, as consequences, +other effects besides." It is so with these two Sacraments. Body and +Soul are so involved, that what directly affects the one must +indirectly affect the other. Thus, the direct effect of Penance on the +soul must indirectly affect the body, and the direct effect of Unction +on the body must indirectly affect the soul. We will think of each in +turn. First, Penance. + +{145} + +_Penance._ + +The word is derived from the Latin _penitentia_, penitence, and its +root-meaning (_poena_, punishment) suggests a punitive element in all +real repentance. It is used as a comprehensive term for confession of +sin, punishment for sin, and the Absolution, or Remission of Sins. As +Baptism was designed to recover the soul from original or inherited +sin, so Penance was designed to recover the soul from actual or wilful +sin....[1] It is not, as in the case of infant Baptism, administered +wholly irrespective of free will: it must be freely sought ("if he +humbly and heartily desire it"[2]) before it can be freely bestowed. +Thus, Confession must precede Absolution, and Penitence must precede +and accompany Confession. + + + +_Confession._ + +Here we all start on common ground. We all agree upon one point, viz. +the necessity of Confession (1) _to God_ ("If we confess our sins, He +is faithful and just to forgive us our sins") {146} and (2) _to man_ +("Confess your faults one to another"). Further, we all agree that +confession to man is in reality confession to God ("Against Thee, _Thee +only_, have I sinned"). Our only ground of difference is, not +_whether_ we ought to confess, but _how_ we ought to confess. It is a +difference of method rather than of principle. + +There are two ways of confessing sins (whether to God, or to man), the +informal, and the formal. Most of us use one way; some the other; many +both. + +_Informal Confession_.--Thank God, I can use this way at any, and at +every, moment of my life. If I have sinned, I need wait for no formal +act of Confession; but, as I am, and where I am, I can make my +Confession. Then, and there, I can claim the Divine response to the +soul's three-fold _Kyrie_: "Lord, have mercy upon me; Christ, have +mercy upon me; Lord, have mercy upon me". But do I never want--does +God never want--anything more than this? The soul is not always +satisfied with such an easy method of going to Confession. It needs at +times something more impressive, something perhaps less superficial, +less easy going. It demands more time for {147} deepening thought, and +greater knowledge of what it has done, before sin's deadly hurt cuts +deep enough to produce real repentance, and to prevent repetition. At +such times, it cries for something more formal, more solemn, than +instantaneous confession. It needs, what the Prayer Book calls, "a +special Confession of sins". + +_Formal Confession_.--Hence our Prayer Book provides two formal Acts of +Confession, and suggests a third. Two of these are for public use, the +third for private. + +In Matins and Evensong, and in the Eucharistic Office, a form of +"_general_ confession" is provided. Both forms are in the first person +plural throughout. Clearly, their primary intention is, not to make us +merely think of, or confess, our own personal sins, but the sins of the +Church,--and our own sins, as members of the Church. It is "we" have +sinned, rather than "I" have sinned. Such formal language might, +otherwise, at times be distressingly unreal,--when, e.g., not honestly +feeling that the "burden" of our own personal sin "is intolerable," or +when making a public Confession in church directly after a personal +Confession in private. + +In the Visitation of the Sick, the third mode of {148} formal +Confession is suggested, though the actual words are naturally left to +the individual penitent. The Prayer Book no longer speaks in the +plural, or of "a _general_ Confession," but it closes, as it were, with +the soul, and gets into private, personal touch with it: "Here shall +the sick man be moved to make a _special_ Confession of his sins, if he +feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter; after which +Confession, the Priest shall absolve him (if he humbly and heartily +desire it) after this sort". This Confession is to be both free and +formal: formal, for it is to be made before the Priest in his +"_ministerial_" capacity; free, for the penitent is to be "moved" (not +"compelled") to confess. Notice, he _is_ to be moved; but then (though +not till then) he is free to accept, or reject, the preferred means of +grace. + +God never handcuffs Sacraments and souls. Sacraments are open to all; +they are forced on none. They are love-tokens of the Sacred Heart; +free-will offerings of His Royal Bounty. + +These, then, are the two methods of Confession at our disposal. God is +"the Father of an infinite Majesty". In _informal_ Confession, the +sinner goes to God as his _Father_,--as the Prodigal, after doing +penance in the far country, went {149} to his father with "_Father_, I +have sinned". In _formal_ Confession, the sinner goes to God as to the +Father of an _infinite Majesty_,--as David went to God through Nathan, +God's ambassador. + +It is a fearful responsibility to hinder any soul from using either +method; it is a daring risk to say: "Because one method alone appeals +to me, therefore no other method shall be used by you". God multiplies +His methods, as He expands His love: and if any "David" is drawn to say +"I have sinned" before the appointed "Nathan," and, through prejudice +or ignorance, such an one is hindered from so laying his sins on Jesus, +God will require that soul at the hinderer's hands. + + + +_Absolution._ + +It is the same with Absolution as with Confession. Here, too, we start +on common ground. All agree that "_God only_ can forgive sins," and +half our differences come because this is not recognized. Whatever +form Confession takes, the penitent exclaims: "_To Thee only it +appertaineth to forgive sins_". Pardon through the Precious Blood is +the one, and only, source of {150} forgiveness. Our only difference, +then, is as to God's _methods_ of forgiveness. How does God forgive +sin? Some seem to limit His love, to tie forgiveness down to one, and +only one, method of absolution--direct, personal, instantaneous, +without any ordained Channel such as Christ left. Direct, God's pardon +certainly is; personal and instantaneous, it certainly can be; without +any sacramental _media_, it certainly may be. But we dare not limit +what God has not limited; we dare not deny the existence of ordained +channels, because God can, and does, act without such channels. He has +opened an ordained fountain for sin and uncleanness as a superadded +gift of love, and in the Ministry of reconciliation He conveys pardon +through this channel. + +At the most solemn moment of his life, when a Deacon is ordained +Priest, the formal terms of his Commission to the Priesthood run thus: +"Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest in the +Church of God, now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our hands. +Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou +dost retain, they are retained." "_Now_ committed unto thee." No +Priest dare hide his commission, play with {151} the plain meaning of +the words, or conceal from others a "means of grace" which they have a +blessed right to know of, and to use. + +But what is the good of this Absolution, if God can forgive without it? +God's ordinances are never meaningless. There must, therefore, be some +superadded grace attached to this particular ordinance. It was left to +be used. It is not left merely to comfort the penitent (though that it +does), nor to let him hear from a fellow-sinner that his sins are +forgiven him (though that he does); but it is left, like any other +Sacrament, as a special means of grace. It is the ordained Channel +whereby God's pardon is conveyed to (and only to) the penitent sinner. +"No penitence, no pardon," is the law of Sacramental Absolution. + +The Prayer Book, therefore, preaches the power of formal, as well as +informal, Absolution. There are in it three forms of Absolution, +varying in words but the same in power. The appropriating power of the +penitent may, and does, vary, according to the sincerity of his +confession: Absolution is in each case the same. It is man's capacity +to receive it, not God's power in giving it, that varies. Thus, all +three Absolutions in the {152} Prayer Book are of the same force, +though our appropriating capacity in receiving them may differ. This +capacity will probably be less marked at Matins and Evensong than at +Holy Communion, and at Holy Communion than in private Confession, +because it will be less personal, less thorough. The words of +Absolution seem to suggest this. The first two forms are in the plural +("pardon and deliver _you_"), and are thrown, as it were, broadcast +over the Church: the third is special ("forgive _thee_ thine offences") +and is administered to the individual. But the formal act is the same +in each case; and to stroll late into church, as if the Absolution in +Matins and Evensong does not matter, may be to incur a very distinct +loss. + +When, and how often, formal "special Confession" is to be used, and +formal Absolution to be sought, is left to each soul to decide. The +two special occasions which the Church of England emphasizes (without +limiting) are before receiving the Holy Communion, and when sick. + +Before Communion, the Prayer Book counsels its use for any disquieted +conscience; and the {153} Rubric which directs intending Communicants +to send in their names to the Parish Priest the day before making their +Communion, still bears witness to its framers' intention--that known +sinners might not be communicated without first being brought to a +state of repentance. + +The sick, also, after being directed to make their wills,[3] and +arrange their temporal affairs, are further urged to examine their +spiritual state; to make a special confession; and to obtain the +special grace, in the special way provided for them. And, adds the +Rubric, "men should often be put in remembrance to take order for the +settling of their temporal estates, while they are in health"--and if +of the temporal, how much more of their spiritual estate. + + + +_Direction._ + +But, say some, is not all this very weakening to the soul? They are, +probably, mixing up two things,--the Divine Sacrament of forgiveness +which (rightly used) must be strengthening, and the human appeal for +direction which (wrongly used) may be weakening. + +{154} + +But "direction" is not necessarily part of Penance. The Prayer Book +lays great stress upon it, and calls it "ghostly counsel and advice," +but it is neither Confession nor Absolution. It has its own place in +the Prayer Book;[4] but it has not, necessarily, anything whatever to +do with the administration of the Sacrament. Direction may, or may +not, be good for the soul. It largely depends upon the character of +the penitent, and the wisdom of the Director. It is quite possible for +the priest to over-direct, and it is fatally possible for the penitent +to think more of direction than of Absolution. It is quite possible to +obscure the Sacramental side of Penance with a human craving for +"ghostly counsel and advice". Satan would not be Satan if it were not +so. But this "ghostly," or spiritual, "counsel and advice" has saved +many a lad, and many a man, from many a fall; and when rightly sought, +and wisely given is, as the Prayer Book teaches, a most helpful adjunct +to Absolution. Only, it is not, necessarily, a part of "going to +Confession". + +{155} + +_Indulgences._ + +The abuse of the Sacrament is another, and not unnatural objection to +its use; and it often gets mixed up with Mediaeval teaching about +Indulgences. + +An _Indulgence_ is exactly what the word suggests--the act of +indulging, or granting a favour. In Roman theology, an Indulgence is +the remission of temporal punishment due to sin after Absolution. It +is either "plenary," i.e. when the whole punishment is remitted, or +"partial," when some of it is remitted. At corrupt periods of Church +history, these Indulgences have been bought for money,[5] thus making +one law for the rich, and another for the poor. Very naturally, the +scandals connected with such buying and selling raised suspicions +against the Sacrament with which Indulgences were associated.[6] But +Indulgences have nothing in the world to do with the right use of the +lesser Sacrament of Penance. + +{156} + +_Amendment._ + +The promise of Amendment is an essential part of Penance. It is a +necessary element in all true contrition. Thus, the penitent promises +"true amendment" before he receives Absolution. If he allowed a priest +to give him Absolution without firmly purposing to amend, he would not +only invalidate the Absolution, but would commit an additional sin. +The promise to amend may, like any other promise, be made and broken; +but the deliberate purpose must be there. + +No better description of true repentance can be found than in +Tennyson's "Guinevere":-- + + _For what is true repentance but in thought--_ + _Not ev'n in inmost thought to think again_ + _The sins that made the past so pleasant to us._ + + +Such has been the teaching of the Catholic Church always, everywhere, +and at all times: such is the teaching of the Church of England, as +part of that Church, and as authoritatively laid down in the Book of +Common Prayer. + +God alone can forgive sins. Absolution is the conveyance of God's +pardon to the penitent sinner by God's ordained Minister, through the +ordained Ministry of Reconciliation. + +{157} + + Lamb of God, the world's transgression + Thou alone canst take away; + Hear! oh! hear our heart's confession, + And Thy pardoning grace convey. + Thine availing intercession + We but echo when we pray. + + + +[1] Cf. Rubric in the Baptismal Office. + +[2] Rubric in the Order for the Visitation of the Sick. + +[3] Rubric in the Order for the Visitation of the Sick. + +[4] See the First Exhortation in the Order of the Administration of the +Holy Communion. + +[5] St. Peter's at Rome was largely built out of funds gained by the +sale of indulgences. + +[6] The Council of Trent orders that Indulgences must be granted by +Pope and Prelate _gratis_. + + + + +{158} + +CHAPTER XII. + +UNCTION. + +The second Sacrament of Recovery is _Unction_, or, in more familiar +language, "the Anointing of the Sick". It is called by Origen "the +complement of Penance". + +The meaning of the Sacrament is found in St. James v. 14-17. "Is any +sick among you? let him call for the elders of the Church; and let them +pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the +prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; +and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him." + +Here the Bible states that the "Prayer of Faith" with Unction is more +effective than the "Prayer of Faith" without Unction. What can it do? + +It can do two things. It can (1) recover the body, and (2) restore the +soul. Its primary {159} object seems to be to recover the body; but it +also, according to the teaching of St. James, restores the soul. +First, he says, Anointing with the Prayer of Faith heals the body; and +then, because of the inseparable union between body and soul, it +cleanses the soul. + +Thus, as the object of Penance is primarily to heal the soul, and +indirectly to heal the body; so the object of Unction is primarily to +heal the body, and indirectly to heal the soul. + +The story of Unction may be summarized very shortly. It was instituted +in Apostolic days, when the Apostles "anointed with oil many that were +sick and healed them" (St. Mark vi. 13). It was continued in the Early +Church, and perpetuated during the Middle Ages, when its use (by a +"_corrupt_[1] following of the Apostles") was practically limited to +the preparation of the dying instead of (by a _correct_ "following of +the Apostles") being used for the recovery of the living. In our 1549 +Prayer Book an authorized Office was appointed for its use, but this, +lest it should be misused, was omitted in 1552. And although, as +Bishop Forbes says, "everything of that earlier Liturgy was praised by +those who {160} removed it," it has not yet been restored. It is "one +of the lost Pleiads" of our present Prayer Book. But, as Bishop Forbes +adds, "there is nothing to hinder the revival of the Apostolic and +Scriptural Custom of Anointing the Sick whenever any devout person +desires it".[2] + + + +_Extreme Unction._ + +An unhistoric use of the name partly explains the unhistoric use of the +Sacrament. _Extreme_, or last (_extrema_) Unction has been taken to +mean the anointing of the sick when _in extremis_. This, as we have +seen, is a "corrupt," and not a correct, "following of the Apostles". +The phrase _Extreme_ Unction means the extreme, or last, of a series of +ritual Unctions, or anointings, once used in the Church. The first +Unction was in Holy Baptism, when the Baptized were anointed with Holy +Oil: then came the anointing in Confirmation: then in Ordination; and, +last of all, the anointing of the sick. Of this last anointing, it is +written: "All Christian men should account, and repute the said manner +of anointing among the other Sacraments, forasmuch as it is a visible +sign of an invisible grace".[3] + +{161} + +_Its Administration._ + +It must be administered under the Scriptural conditions laid down in +St. James v. 14-16. The first condition refers to:-- + +(1) _The Minister_.--The Minister is _the Church_, in her corporate +capacity. Scripture says to the sick: "Let him call for the Elders," +or Presbyters, "of the Church". The word is in the plural; it is to be +the united act of the whole Church. And, further, there must be +nothing secret about it, as if it were either a charm, or something to +be ashamed of, or apologized for. It may have to be done in a private +house, but it is to be done by no private person.[4] "Let him call for +the elders." + +(2) _The Manner_.--The Elders are to administer Sacrament not in their +own name (any more than the Priest gives Absolution in his own name), +but "in the Name of the Lord". + +(3) _The Method_.--The sick man is to be anointed (either on the +afflicted part, or in other ways), _with prayer_: "Let them pray over +him". Prayer is essential. + +{162} + +(4) _The Matter_.--Oil--"anointing him with oil". As in Baptism, +sanctified water is the ordained matter by which "Jesus Christ +cleanseth us from all sin"; so in Unction, consecrated oil is the +ordained matter used by the Holy Ghost to cleanse us from all +sickness--bodily, and (adds St. James) spiritual. "And if he have +committed sins, they shall be forgiven him." + +For this latter purpose, there are two Scriptural requirements: +_Confession_ and _Intercession_. For it follows: "Confess your faults +one to another, and pray for one another that ye may be healed". Thus +it is with Unction as with other Sacraments; with the "last" as with +the first--special grace is attached to special means. The Bible says +that, under certain conditions, oil and prayer together will effect +more than either oil or prayer apart; that oil without prayer cannot, +and prayer without oil will not, win the special grace of healing +guaranteed to the use of oil and prayer together. + +In our days, the use of anointing with prayer is (in alliance with, and +in addition to, Medical Science) being more fully recognized. "The +Prayer of Faith" is coming into its own, and is being placed once more +in proper position in the {163} sphere of healing; _anointing_ is being +more and more used "according to the Scriptures". Both are being used +together in a simple belief in revealed truth. It often happens that +"the elders of the Church" are sent for by the sick; a simple service +is used; the sick man is anointed; the united "Prayer of Faith" (it +_must_ be "of Faith") is offered; and, if it be good for his spiritual +health, the sick man is "made whole of whatsoever disease he had". + +God give us in this, as in every other Sacrament, a braver, quieter, +more loving faith in His promises. The need still exists: the grace is +still to be had. + + _If our love were but more simple,_ + _We should take Him at His word;_ + _And our lives would be all sunshine_ + _In the sweetness of our Lord._ + + + +[1] Article XXV. + +[2] "Forbes on the Articles" (xxv.). + +[3] "Institution of a Christian Man." + +[4] In the Greek Church, seven, or at least three, Priests must be +present. + + + + +{165} + +INDEX. + + + A. + + Absolution, 149. + Adoption, 76. + Affusion, 65. + Altar, 86. + Amendment, 156. + Anointing, 104, 158. + Aspersion, 65. + Augustine, St., 3, 12, 13, 49. + + + B. + + Baptism, Sacrament of, 63. + Forms of administration, 65. + Ministry of, 65. + Bible, the, names of, 26. + Inspiration of, 34. + Interpretation of, 23. + MSS., 27. + Versions, 32. + Bishops, 124. + Their Confirmation, 127. + " Consecration, 127. + " Election, 126. + " Homage, 128. + " Nomination, 126. + Books, the Church's, 21 + Breviary, 44. + Bright, Dr., 8. + + + C. + + Chrism, 67. + Christian name, 73. + Church, the, names of-- + Catholic, 2. + Church of England, 12. + Established, 7. + National, 4. + Primitive, 17, + Protestant, 18. + Reformed, 14. + Clergymen, 134. + Communion, Holy, 82. + Confession, 145. + Confirmation, 94. + Age, 101. + Essentials, 103. + Names of, 104. + New name at, 73. + Sacrament of completion, 93. + Consecration, 83, 91. + Consignation, 68. + Consubstantiation, 84. + Criticism, 36. + Higher, 36. + Historical, 36. + Lower, 36. + + + D. + + Deacons, ordination of, 139. + Age of, 139. + Laity and responsibility, 140. + Preparation of, 140. + Direction, 153. + Discipline, 54. + Dissenters and Confirmation, 99. + + + E. + + Election, 78. + Endowments, 11. + Established Church, 7. + Eucharist, 81. + Extreme Unction, 160. + + + F. + + Faith and Prayer with oil, 162. + + + G. + + God-parents, 65. + Gospels, the, 44. + Gradual, the, 44. + + + H. + + Holy Orders, 123. + Homage of Bishops, 128. + + + I. + + Illingworth, Dr., 61. + Immersion, 65, 67. + Indulgences, 155. + Inspiration, 34. + Interpretation of Scripture, 33. + + + J. + + Jurisdiction, 129. + + + K. + + Kings and Bishops, 126, 128. + + + L. + + Laity responsible for ordination of deacons, 140. + Lesser Sacraments, 92. + Liddon, Dr., 143. + Lightfoot, Bishop, 124. + Liturgy, 81. + + + M. + + Manual, the, 44. + Manuscripts of the Bible, 26. + Marriage, 106. + A Sacrament, 107, 110. + Affinity, 116. + Age, 117. + By banns, 118. + By licence, 119. + Consanguinity, 116. + Deceased wife's sister, 117. + Divorce, 108. + False names, 121. + In registry office, 110. + Who for, 107, 113, 116. + Mass, 81. + Matter, 61. + Minister, 132. + Missal, the, 43. + + + N. + + Name, Christian, 73. + Nonconformists and Holy Communion, 99. + + + O. + + Oil, Holy, 159. + Orders, Holy, 123. + Bishops, 124. + Deacons, 139. + Indelibility of, 136. + Priests, 130. + + + P. + + Parson, 133. + Penance, 145. + Perpetuation, Sacraments of, 93. + Pontifical, the, 43. + Prayer Book, 40. + Its contents, 50. + " preface, 47. + " title, 42. + Priesthood, 130. + Primitive Church, 7. + Protestant Church, 18. + + + R. + + Reconciliation, ministry of, 145. + Recovery, Sacrament of, 93, 145. + Reformed Church, 14. + Regeneration, 75. + Revelation, 37. + + + S. + + Sacraments, 58. + Their names, 62. + " nature, 60. + " number, 59. + The Blessed Sacrament, 81. + The lesser, 92. + Sacrifice, 82, 87. + Sanday, Dr., 35. + Scriptures, the, 26. + Sects, 9. + Spiritualities and Temporalities, 128. + Sponsors, 65. + Stubbs, Bishop, 8, 10. + Supper, the Lord's, 82. + + + T. + + Table, the Holy, 88. + Threefold Ministry, 124. + Transubstantiation, 83, 84. + Trine immersion, 67. + + + U. + + Unction, Extreme, 160. + Unction, Holy, 159. + + + W. + + Word of God, 31. + + + + +ABERDEEN: THE UNIVERSITY PRESS + + + + + + + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Church: Her Books and Her +Sacraments, by E. E. Holmes + +*** \ No newline at end of file