NYPL RESEARCH LIBRARIES
3 3433 07994415 7
Ys^K LAYHANS:
Xfe'A MANDBOOK.
Second Edition, KEVi5ED d«B Enlarged
r^^
THE LAYMAN'S HANDBOOK.
PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL ^'^'^
\
LAYMAN'S HANDBOOK
CONTAINING
AN EXPLANATION
OF
THE INNOVATIONS OF THE LAST
HALF-CENTURY
TOGETHER WITH
A Short Account of the English Inquisition of the
ijtJi Century
SECOND Er3ITI0N, REVISED AND ENLARGED
BY
AN EX CHURCHWARDEN
NEW YORK
THE BAKER & TAYLOR CO.
Toronto : Hart & Company
I 891
PREFACE.
" Every man to his trade, quoth the boy to the
bishop," is an old and true proverb — to the clergyman,
divinity ; the barrister, law ; the doctor, medicine ;
the merchant, traffic ; the mechanic, the use of instru-
ments or tools, and in this busy world few are able to
devote much time to any but their own branches, and
we therefore offer this little work to those of our breth-
ren who may be anxious to solve certain moot points,
for in two sermons a week ministers cannot be ex-
pected to explain everything ; besides which they do
not always judge matters from a layman's standpoint,
sometimes preferring Churchianity to Christianity, and
at times, too, not appearing to remember that " there
is no respect of persons with God " (Rom. ii. 1 1), and
that whether seated like sovereigns on the dais or
raised chancel, or beneath in the nave, all Christ's faith-
ful followers are ** priests and kings unto GOD," (Rev.
i. 6.)
Although in the past half century we have listened
to many most admirable preachers, there are still vex-
ed questions which we have never heard referred to in
the pulpit, one amongst them being the so-called
" Apostles' Creed," which was not written by the
vi Preface.
Apostles, neither does it in one respect contain their
doctrine.
The rubric does not even agree with the Articles !
In the former which everyone reads and with few ex-
ceptions believes, because it is in the Prayer Book, it
is unequivocally called " The Apostles' Creed," while
in the 8th Article it is styled '* commonly called the
Apostles' Creed," but how many read the Articles
and of those readers how many are there who notice
the discrepancy ?
Our Reformers who had just come out of the Church
of Rome could hardly help believing soine of the tra-
ditions, one of which was that each of the twelve
Apostles had a share in its composition, but it is now
acknowledged that its earliest known form., viz : that
of Rufinus, A.D. 390, with one important clause ex-
cepted, dates from about three centuries after the
death of the last of the Apostles. That clause, and
we never hear minister and people say " He descended
into hell " without a painful feeling, was a later addi-
tion. Moreover the word " Catholic " does not occur
in the above creed having been also a later addition.
Is it Apostolic doctrine that our most blessed Lord
told the penitent thief that He would meet him this
day in hell ? Can this be proved as stated in the 8th
Article ? The Nicene Creed does not say so, neither
does the so-called " Athanasian Creed," and far above
all the N. T. does not say so. Scholars of course tell us
Preface. vii
that hell means hades, but the P. B. was not written
for scholars alone, but for the vast majority whose
professions or occupations do not necessitate a know-
ledge of the dead languages, and who naturally
consider hell to be the place of torment.
In the rubric this last creed is styled " commonly
called the Creed of St. Athanasius," while in the 8th
Article it is called outright the Athanasian Creed.
We know now, however, that bishop Athanasius did
not write this creed, and the Americans left it out of
their Prayer Book a century ago.
We call Easter the Queen of Feasts " on which the
rest depend." It is intended to be the anniversary of
the Resurrection, but we do not know the date when
that occurred.
Dr. Hook, Dean of Chichester, in his Church Dic-
tionary (9th Ed., London, 1864), says, "it is called in
English, Easter from the Saxon Eostre, an ancient
goddess of that people, worshipped with peculiar* cere-
monies in the month of April, and gives a long account
of the ancient disputes concerning the date of its cele-
bration, but why does he not tell us what is far more
important, that the Church Historian of the fifth
century, Socrates, says in his opinion the feast was
introduced into the Church froju sotne old usage?
(See Easter).
*He might have said with impure ceremonies, for she, as Venus, was
the mother of all impurity.
viii Preface.
It was, undoubtedly, one of the many cases of com-
promise, according to the miserable policy of those
days of meeting the Pagans half way. As they would
not give up the Feast of their goddess it was adopted
by the Church as the day for commemorating our
Lord's Resurrection.
Canon Robertson, even as late as 1867,* does not
appear to have known the origin of Easter, neither to
have noticed the remarks of Tertullian nor Socrates,
but quoting Bingham, Neander and others he says,
" The most plausible of the etymologies proposed for
the German Ostern and English Easter appear to be
(i) from the old Teutonic iirstan (to rise up); (2) from
the name of a Saxon goddess whose festival fell on the
same season."
The venerable Bede, however, who may almost be
styled a contemporary authority as he was born in 672,
or about 75 years after Augustine introduced Christian-
ity among the Anglo Saxons and only twenty years
after the Middle Angles were converted (A.D. 653)
says decidedly that the name was derived from the
goddess Eostre! This Eostre, was the same as the
Syrian Astarte, who was the same as Venus. No
scholar can disprove this, and we call the day on which
we celebrate the anniversary of the RESURRECTION of
our most blessed Lord and Saviour, the Feast of
Venus !
*Hi.story of the Christian Church, Fourth Edition, London, 1867.
There may be later editions, but we are trusting to our own Library
only.
Preface. ix
It is folly to deny this, for why should the truth be
concealed ? Must we forever, like the Athenians,
" ignorantly worship ? "
What has been the effect of this ignorance or con-
cealment of the truth? In 1878 the Irish Church
revised the P. B. Under " Commination," they re-
peated from our P. B. that this discipline of sackcloth
and ashes was a godly one of the Primitive Church.
This is simply an error, no doubt believed to be true
when the statement was originally made, but we are
better informed now, for while some consider the Early
Church to have ended with the death of St. John in
the year 100, the latest date allowed is A.D. 314, and
although some claim that this rite of public penance
was instituted in the sixth century by the council of
Agde, others believe it can hardly be later than the
ninth century. It was not a godly discipline of the
Primitive Church, but a Romish one of the Dark
Ages. (See Co7Jtmiiiation)
Look then at Ember Days. They retained these
as they say in the Canons, " In accordance with the
ancient custom of the Church." What church was it ?
Again the church of the Dark Ages ! It was a local
custom of the Roman Church fiist mentioned about
the middle of the fourth century, more than a century
after the end of the Primitive Church (latest date) and
as long also after the First Council of Nice in 325,
when Hosius, fearing to be outnumbered by the Arians,
called the Egyptians to the rescue and agreed to
acknowledge their goddess I sis as the Virgin Mary.
X Preface.
These Ember fasts were not introduced into Eng-
land until about the time of Charlemagne (A.D. 742-
814), and to this day, even if there are not to be any
ordinations in our own diocese, or elsewhere to our
knowledge, they must be observed with special fasting
and prayer.
At the Reformation when all Processions were abol-
ished the perambulation of the circuits of parishes on
the old Rogation Days was retained for the purpose of
keeping fresh in the minds of each passing generation
the bounds of the parishes and although the old litanies
were dropped, no prayers in lieu thereof have ever
been published, but the seed was left in the calendar,
and after more than three centuries, the Synod of
Niagara, not an humble, ignorant lay Synodsman
only, but the whole Council (to use the Latin term)
of the Diocese memorialized the Provincial Synod in
Montreal for prayers for this French R. C. bishop's
institution, but it was left among the unfinished busi-
ness and not brought up again.
We will not add more on this subject here.
Since our first edition Archbishop Benson has pub-
lished his judgment in the Lincoln case. We have
not referred to it as it has no binding force and can-
not be said in a legal sense to settle anything.
Bishop Ryle has requested his clergy to make no
alterations in the conduct of their services at the Holy
Communion for two reasons. On the one hand the
Preface. xi
case is not finally settled as there is about to be an
appeal to the Privy Council, and on the other hand it
appears legally doubtful whether the recent judgment
is of any force in the Northern Province of the Church
of England even if there was no appeal. At any rate
he says the Archbishop of York and his suffragans
have had no voice in the matter.
If we have not always been careful to quote our
authorities the reason is evident, this work being in-
tended principally for the general public who frequently
have not the time nor opportunity to refer to such, and
we did not wish to overburden the pages with notes.
As regards scholars, they will not need the information.
Some of these articles have already appeared as
privately printed leaflets, and a few have been re-
printed by others for sale.
PROTESTANT
LAYMAN'S HANDBOOK
Absolution, At the Hampton Court Conference
in 1603, when the Prayer Book was revised for the
fourth time, the Puritans (who were so called because
they desired the pure word of God free from tradition)*
or original Low Churchmen, objected to the word
Absolution in Morning and Evening Prayer, as having
a Popish sound, and as a slight concession the words
" or Remission of Sins " were added. It was then to
be pronounced by a Minister, but at the Revision of
1662, that title was changed to " priest," in direct oppo-
sition to their wishes. Before the alteration deacons
could use it.
There are many who believe that our so-called
" priests " have themselves the power by this absolu-
tion to absolve the people from their sins, from the
words of Christ "Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are
remitted," — but this power was given to His Apostles
alone, who had no successors.
Wheatly, (not to be confounded with Archbishop
Whately) in his Rational Illustration of the Book of
Common Prayer^ says that when the priest by virtue
*Differing from the Church of Rome, who like the Pharisees *' teach
for commandments the traditions of men," while Low Churchmen
still hold the absolute supremacy of the Holy Scriptures in matters ol
faith,
14 Absolution.
of this power and commandment declares and pro-
nounces such absolution and remission " those in the
congregation who truly repent and unfeignedly believe
God's Holy Gospel (though the priest does not know
who or how many there are that do so) Jiave yet their
pardon conveyed and sealed to tJieni at that very instant
tJiroiigh Jus ministration I " And there are many who
agree with him, but should a penitent sinner on a
Monday morning say
"Just as I am — without one plea,
But that Thy blood was shed for me,
And that Thou bidd'st me come to Thee —
O Lamb of God, I come, "
must he wait until the " priest " has pronounced the
Absolution on the following Sunday before his pardon
is "conveyed and sealed" to him — and what if he dies
before that Sunday ? Moreover if this mortal can so
easily obtain our pardon by pronouncing a few words,
why cannot he also heal the sick ?
In all the modern revised Prayer Books (except the
Irish which needs to be revised again) this priestly
assumption is guarded against. Perhaps the best is in
the English Reformed Episcopal Prayer Book, where-
in it reads " The Declaration of God's mercy to all
who trnly repent and believe His Holy Gospel," and
instead of saying that GoD hath given power and com-
mandment to his ministers it reads that GoD hath
" declared and pronounced to His people, the Abso-
lution and Remission." It is the same in the Canadian
R. E. P. B, except that the word Absolution is ex-
punged. In the first Canadian R. E. P. B. the Abso-
lution was entirely expunged and that in our Commu-
nion Service used instead ; not called an Absolution,
however, and the word ns was substituted for you.
" Have mercy upon 7is ; pardon and deliver us from all
our sins."
Absohition — Agmis Dei after Consecration. 15
Among the many proposed alterations perhaps the
most judicious is that the rubric be changed to
" A Declaration that GOD pardoneth penitent sinners,
to be read by the minister," and further to alter it to
" hath declared and pronounced to His people /r^^ and
fill forgiveness of their sins," thereby doing away en-
tirely with the idea of priestly absolution.
In the Spanish Prayer Book after a Declaration of
God's mercy to be said by the Presbyter (or the Bishop
if he be present) the people answer " God Almighty
have mercy upon thee also, pardon all thy sins, and
bring thee unto life everlasting, through Jesus Christ
our Lord. Amen."
Agfnus Dei after Consecration. When the
'' Agnus ^' or in English, " O Lamb of God that taketh
away the sins of the world " is said or sung here, it
means that it is then sung to the Lamb Himself, who
is there before the so-called "priest " on the so-called
"altar!" This is Romish doctrine for that Church
believes that after consecration, the wafer (which they
use instead of bread) and the wine become really and
truly Christ Himself, body, blood, nerves and bones,
soul and divinity !
As transubstantiation was not formally rejected in
1 549, the Agnns was retained in the First Prayer Book
of King Edward, but when the doctrine of the Church
of England was altered in this matter and altars were
taken down in 1550, the sacrificial character of the
priest expunged from the ordinal and the Articles
condemning transubstantiation put forth in 1552, it
was no longer consistent to sing the Agnus as before,
and when the Second Book was issued in the latter
year the Agnus was expunged altogether, and not
only so but as a similiar clause occurs in the Gloria in
Excelsis, which was previously sung at the beginning
1 6 Agnus Dei after Consecyation — St. Alban.
of the communion, the Gloria was removed from its
place and put at the end of the service where it is now,
so that it could not possibly be addressed to the conse-
crated elements, all of which had been previously
consumed.
Alban, St. The whole story of this so-called " pro-
tomartyr " is a monkish fraud, as is shown by Froude
in his ** Short Stories on Great Subjects " (Longmans'
1877), and in Smith's ** Christian Biography," we read,
" St. Alban, if he ever existed.''
We are told that he was martyred in 302, at Verulam
now called St. Alban's, and his body was found by a
miracle in 791, but that we may form som.e idea of the
tendencies in matters connected with religion of those
days in which this alleged miracle was performed, we
have only to turn to Robertson, who says, " The
reverence of saints rose higher; their intercession and
protection were entreated, their relics were eagerly
sought after, and extravagant stories were told of
miracles wrought not only by such relics themselves,
but by clothes which had touched them, and by water
in which they had been dipped. Churches were dedi-
cated to saints and aiigels Relics of
scriptural personages continued to be found. Spurious
relics were largely manufactured. Lives of recent
saints were composed — full of miraculous recitals.
Saints of older date were supplied with biographies
written in a like spirit of accommodation to the pre-
vailing taste ; and imaginary saints ivitJi suitable
histories were invented." And Mosheim says " Cer-
tain tombs were falsely given out for the sepulchres
of saints and confessors ; the list of the saints was
augmented with fictitions names. Some buried the
bones of dead men in certain retired places, and
then affirmed that they were divinely admonished by
vS*^. A lb an, ty
a dream that the body of some friend of God lay
there. A whole volume would be requisite to contain
an enumeration of the various frauds which artful
knaves practised with success, to delude the ignorant,
when true religion was almost entirely superseded by
horrid superstition." And again " as the demand for
relics was prodigious and universal, the clergy em-
ployed all their dexterity to satisfy those demands,
and were far from being nice in the methods they used
for that end. The bodies of saints were sought by
fasting and prayer instituted by the priests in order to
obtain a divine answer, and an infallible direction, and
the pretended direction never failed to accomplish
their desires ; the holy carcass was always found, and
that always in consequence, as they impiously gave
out, of the suggestion and inspiration of GOD Himself.
But there were many, who, unable to
procure for themselves these spiritual treasures by
voyages and prayers, had recourse to violence and
theft ; for all sorts of attempts in a cause of this
nature were considered, when successful, as pious and
acceptable to the Supreme Being."
We have quoted Robertson and Mosheim, but for
the information of the general reader will add these
are no mean authorities, the first having been a Canon
of Canterbury Cathedral and Professor of Ecclesiasti-
cal History in King's College, London, and the Rev.
Dr. Mosheim was Chancellor of the University of
Gottingen. He died in 1757, and his impartiality
has never been questioned.
Hallam says, " It must not be supposed that these
absurdities were produced, as well as nourished, by
ignorance. In most cases they were the work of
deliberate imposture. Every cathedral or monastery
had its tutelar saint ; and every saint his legend, fabri-
cated in order to enrich the churches under his protec-
ig St.Alban,
tion by exaggerating his virtues, his miracles and
consequently his power of serving those who paid
liberally for his patronage."
Captain Conder, a living authority, says, " The sale
of relics which appears to have commenced even in
the second century, developed into a regular trade in
the fourth and fifth, and the bones of saints miracu-
lously discovered yielded constant fresh supplies of
holy bones and other remains."
This Alban is said to have suffered during the
Diocletian persecution in 303, but both the Church
Historians, Eusebius, who was living at the time, and
Sozomen, a century later, deny that that persecution
reached England.
Constantine in his Life of Germanus, bishop of
Auxerre, in France, written shortly before 492, says
the bishop opened Alban's tomb in 429, and deposited
in it some relics of saints, but this was probably an
interpolation, followed however by later writers, as it
was said when the abbey was founded that all memory
of Alban had been lost for five centuries. Gildas who
wrote in 560, also relates the story of the martyrdom,
but this is also probably an interpolation, for the
oldest copy of Gildas is of the thirteenth century.
Gildas says — or rather in Gildas' History it is stated
that on the way to his execution, like the Israelites
who trod dry-foot over Jordan, so also Alban opened
a path across the Thames whose waters stood abrupt
like precipices on every side. We are also told that
he ascended a hill with his persecutors, and when at
the top he prayed for water and a spring burst forth
at his feet ; that when he was for six months in prison
no rain or due moistened the earth, but every day the
whole country was burned up under a most scorching
sun. No fields, nor trees produced any crops, and
when he was beheaded the eyes of the executioner
Si. A lb an. 19
dropped out of their sockets and fell to the ground
with the head of the martyr.
In 791, five centuries after he is said to have died,
Offa, king of Mercia, in expiation of a murder, founded
a monastery at Verulam in honor of Alban. It is said
an angel appeared unto the king and admonished him
to raise out of the earth the body of the martyr, and
the king assembling his clergy and people they com-
menced the search with prayer, fasting and (of course)
alms ; when a ray of fire was seen to stand over the
place of burial, like the Star of Bethlehem, and the
body was found excellently preserved by the relics
placed there by Germanus three centuries before.
Of all absurdities this appears to be the greatest —
that the bones of this great saint required other bones
to preserve it !
Chauncy, the historian of the county, says, " But
others hold that Matthew Paris (ob. 1259)' and the
other monks of St. Alban's invented these fabulous
stories to blind the world and induce the people to
believe the innocency of the wicked king, because he
was their founder, and by such artifices they were
wont to increase their benefactions and the revenue of
their church."
Two centuries after the founding of King Offa's
monastery, the monks of Ely suddenly pretended that
they, and only they, possessed the genuine skeleton,
saying that in Abbot ^Ifric's time fearing that the
Danes were about to attack him and might carry away
the relics, he had sent them to Ely which lay in
swamps and morasses not easily penetrable. When
the box was restored the Ely monks were not ashamed
to boast they had rifled it of its contents. The Abbot
of St. Alban's was, however, equal to the occasion.
He, too, asserted that he had played a trick. He
wished to throw the Danes off the scent, but not trust-
20 St. A /dan.
ing the monks of Ely he had sent the bones of one of
his monks and buried the real reh'cs in a secret place.
Edward the Confessor was appealed to and gave judg-
ment in favour of St. Alban's. The Pope also did the
same. The St. Alban's relics worked miracles, and the
Ely relics replied with other miracles, so that the con-
troversy lasted for centuries. One of the talcs was
that there was a discussion concerning his shrine at
St. Alban's, some of the monks doubting whether he
was buried there, and one evening as one of them was
praying, the shrine burst open and a form appeared,
saying, '' Ecce ego Albamts " — " Behold it is I, Alban ;
did you not see me arise from my tomb ? " " Yes, my
lord and master," replied the monk, whereupon Alban
went back to his coffin.
If now we believe one of these tales we must believe
all, for they all rest on the same foundation.
In later times the monastery of St. Alban's became
so notorious for its luxury, idleness and lasciviousness
that Pope Innocent VIII (who died in 1492) enjoined
Cardinal Morton to visit and report upon it. That
report — the original — is still in Lambeth Palace, and
Froude says of the monastery and its adjoining sister-
hood that they were stained with every crime, even
unto the sin of Sodom, and of the Cardinal's report
that the details cannot be quoted, even in Latin !
Froude, who wrote just before they began to restore
the abbey church of St. Alban's concluded his essay :
'• There is a talk now of restoring St. Alban's. We
are affecting penitence for the vandalism of our Puritan
forefathers, and are anxious to atone for it. ' Cursed
is he that rebuildeth Jericho .^ '"
St. Alban is acknowledged in the Calendar (June
17) as one of our saints to be remembered on All
Saints' Day. Although called the protomartyr, his
name was omitted in Edwards' P. B., but it was
St, Alban—All Saints Day. 21
restored by Sheldon we think. The American Church
expunged it a century ago and it is also expunged
in the Irish and other Revised Prayer Books.
(See All Saints' Day, Invocation of Saints and
Relics)
All Saints' Day. This was instituted in 607, in lieu
of the festival " To all the gods," to whom there was a
separate temple in Rome called the Pantheon (All the
gods) which is still in existence. This was however
transformed into a church dedicated to all the martyrs,
which last word was afterwards changed to saints. To
this day however it bears its ancient name and not
inappropriately, for many of the Romish Saints were
originally Pagan gods or demi-gods.
Who are All the Saints .^ Are there any named in
the O. T. except only Aaron the Saint of the Lord ?
It is true that the Evangelists are so styled in the N. T.
but they are not called saints in the original Greek.
When therefore we pray for grace to follow thy bles-
sed Saints, must we not, like our own Apostle, pray
zvith the -understanding also, and therefore turn to our
only authorized list in the P. B., and pray to follow
in the footsteps of Alban, Dionysus and George,* of
whom elsewhere ; Oannes the sun-god whose name was
changed to the Latin Johannes or John ; Margaret,
who usurped the place of Juno Lucina, and is still in-
voked by R. C. women for the same cause as was .her
* Wheatly, although he stamps as "nonsensical" the story of St.
Dunstan taking a she-devil by the nose with a pair of red-hot tongs,
nevertheless tells us the reason St. George became the patron saint of
P2ngland was because when the son of William the Conqueror was
besieging Antioch, "St George appeared with an immense army com-
ing down from the hills, all in white, with a red cross on his banner, to
reinforce the Christians, which occasioned the infidel army to fly."
Wheatly died in 1742. His book was reprinted by Bohn in 1852, and
was considered a standard work — but no father would dare to read to
his daughter the account he gives of some of the female saints.
22 All Saints Day- Altar.
predecessor ; Martin, anciently Mars ; Pope Fabian,
bishop of Rome in 236 ; Pope Gregory, bishop of
Rome in 590 and the last named of our Protestant
menology, Pope Silvester, bishop of Rome in 314, and
about forty more.
Can we blame the Ritualists for desiring to restore
the Invocation of Saints with this P. B. list before
them, stamped thereby as authorized ?
The supreme Lord of all the gods was the sun-god
who was worshipped by the Phoenicians as Baal-
Samen, Lord of Heaven, and in Ireland as Beuil-
Samhan. The night of the ist of November is called
in Erse, to this very day, Oidche Samhna, the Night
of Samhan, and in Gaelic also Oidche Samhna or
Samhuinn. Our Gaelic Dictionary says only Sam-
huinn, and that there might be no question we
summoned our butler, a Highlander, and asked,
" What do you call Hallow'een in Gaelic ? " Without
a moments' hesitation he replied, " Oidche Samhna,
Oidche, sir, means night." Upon pointing out Sam-
huinn in the Dictionary, he did not understand it, and
said that word was not used in his part of the High-
lands. (See AlbaJi, Calendar and Invocation of Saints.)
Altar. God (blessed be His holy name) ordered
but one altar in the whole earth, and that not to be
where His people, nor even Moses nor Aaron should
choose, but where He Himself should choose ; and
when the two tribes built an altar on the east of
Jordan, it was not an altar of sacrifice but an altar of
witness.
Moreover (perhaps to make a wide contrast between
the one altar of the Almighty GOD and the many
elaborate and highly wrought altars of the idolaters)
He ordered that His altar should be made of earth, or
(perhaps on account of the rocky nature of the ground
Altar. 23
where the Israelites camp happened to be stationed) if
it was made of stones it was not to be of hezvn stones
" for if thou lift up thy tool upon it thou hast polluted
it." *' Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto Mine
altar."
It is true that the actual earthen altar made for the
Tabernacle was enclosed in a frame of shittim wood
overlaid with brass ; but this was by God's express
command.
Besides the one altar, altars were erected by Gideon,
Samuel, David and Elijah, but they were temporary,
to meet emergencies, and were erected by the imme-
diate command or inspiration of God Himself
There was also an altar of incense but as Dr.
Perowne pointedly remarked " the term altar was not
strictly appropriate in this instance, as no sacrifices
were offered on it."
When Solomon's altar which was destroyed, was re-
restored, as we learn from the book of Maccabees, which
may be trusted in matters of history, it was built of un-
hewn stones : ** they took whole (holokleroiis) st'ones and
built an altar according to the forniery And when
Herod restored the Temple, the divine commands
were again adhered to, for Josephus says : *' it was
made without any iron tool, neither did iron touch it at
any time."
In the times of the early Church, altars were un-
known. The Communion Tables were of wood, but
about the fifth century, when the Eucharist began to
be regarded as an actual sacrifice then altars of stone
were thought to be necessary, upon which to offer up
the so-called " sacrifice." Probably this was done as
a sort of substitute for the Pagan altars then being
abolished, for although the Christian Church was
founded in Rome before the arrival of Paul, still there
were temples there in the year 400 to Jupiter, Saturn,
24 A Itar — A mbassador.
Cybele and others, and even one hundred years later,
although an edict was passed condemning to death
those found sacrificing according to the Pagan rites,
still there was a certain toleration, and during those
centuries many heathen errors crept into the Church.
In France a statue of Diana was worshipped at the
court of Dagobert II., in 689, and as late as 794, Char-
lemagne found it necessary to publish an edict
ordering sacred groves and trees to be cut down — but
we still place them in our Churches at Christmas !
A decree of the Council of Paris, in 509, ordered
stone altars to be made and they were ordered in Eng-
land by Egbert, Archbishop of York, in 705. Tables
appear however to have continued in use elsewhere
much longer, for according to William of Malmes-
bury, Wulstan, Bishop of Worcester (1062-1095) de-
molished throughout his diocese the wooden tables still
remaining, and about the same time (1076) Lanfranc,
Bishop of Winchester, condemned them.
By an order in Council, Nov. 12, 15 50, letters were
sent to every Bishop "to pluck down the altars," and
the Visitation Articles of Archbishop Grindall in 1567
have the following questions : "whether all altars be
utterly taken dcwn and clean removed, even unto the
foundation, and the place where they stood paved, and
the wall whereunto they joined, w^hitened over V'
We regret to add that in the American Church
Hynmal the word "Bethels" in Nearer my GOD to
Thee, is changed to " altars." " Out of my stony grief
altiws I'll raise." (Sec Coniniuuion 1 able).
Ambassador. When the Revised Version appeared
we hoped to have seen this word altered, for our own
experience was similar to that of Pepys, who says in
1663 "(Lords Day). To church and heard Mr. Mills
preach npon those words ' We are therefore embas-
A mbassador. 2 5
sadors of Christ.' Wherein among many other high
expressions he said, that such a learned man used to
say, that if a niinister of the word and an angel should
meet him together, he would salute the minister first ;
which methought was a little too high."
An ambassador is an officer of the highest rank, sent
out by one Sovereign to anotJier Sovereign. He is deem-
ed to represent the person of his Sovereign, and has
the right of demanding an audience of the Sovereign
to whom he is accredited. England has now only
seven ambassadors, viz. to Germany, Russia, Austria,
Turkey, Spain, Italy and France — the latter embassy
having been established before the formation of the
Republic, when no change was made. She has never
sent an ambassador to the United States. Even at
the time of the Oregon difficulty. Lord Ashburton's
was a special and extraordinary mission only, not an
embassy.
The second in rank is the Envoy Extraordinary and
Minister Plenipotentiary, and the third is the Minister
Resident, both of whom represent their Government,
not their Sovereign, but not one of the three is ac-
credited to the people — the laity.
The Greek word presbeiio in the N.T. should have
been translated eldeis or seniors, and it has always
seemed to us incomprehensible that men professing to
be ministers of the meek and lowly Saviour, with their
Greek Testament and Lexicon before them, could for
one instant dare to believe that Paul, who said of him-
self that he was the least of the Apostles, and not only
the servant of GOD but also our servant — onr servant
— could possibly be guilty of claiming to be the, equal
of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The word ambassador also occurs several times in
the O.T,, but the Hebrew words kits and malak signify
rather intrepreter, messenger or agent. These mes-
26 Avibassador.
sengers or envoys were usually old men of high rank
and were met by delegates of similar dignity, but
they were not ambassadors.
When the Hon. and Rev. Baptist W. Noel, son of
the Earl of Gainsborough and one of the Queen's
chaplains left our Church half a century ago, he said :
'* Priest-craft with a giant stride,
Stalks the land in pomp and pride :
He who should preach only Christ
Now a semi-papal priest
Would the Church's Lord appear,
Not its lowly minister ;
Calling all men great and small
Down before the priest to fall.
None must rest on Christ alone
Till the priest his work has done.
Sacraments the priest extols
For 'tis he each rite controls ;
Priests, ambassadors of heaven
Can pronounce our sins forgiven —
Since whate'er their want of sense
They the gifts of grace dispense ;
Oh ! for an hour of Luther now !
Oh ! for a frown from Calvin's brow !
Once they broke the papal chain —
Who shall break it now airain? "
We had barely concluded the above when the papers
gave an account of an address from Bishop Courtney
to the congregation of St. Paul's church, Halifax,
N.S. He said, " It is not the people's place to watch
if their rector teaches orthodox doctrine, or to criticise
his preaching as if they were the shepherds and not
the sli^cp. They should be willing to learn from their
minister. They should receive Jiiin as Jesus Christ
Himself. When they meet him on the street or invite
him to their homes they should feel that Christ was
meeting or supping with them. Then " exclaimed the
A inbassador —A nyiunciation — A ntJieins. 27
bishop with vehement earnestness " would you dare to
criticise Jesus Christ?"
As this blasphemous bishop claims for his subordi-
nates an equality with the Lord Jesus Christ, what
does he claim for himself?
The congregation were naturally very indignant for
they are not (in the words of Bishop Ryle) '' tame,
ignorant sheep, lead hither and thither at the beck of
an autocratic sacerdotal shepherd."
Since then another Canadian bishop in a Christmas
(1890) letter to the Laity, tells them of the glad
tidings of great joy of which their clergymen " is to
you the bearer and ambassador." We repeat therefore
as this prelate also wishes the people to believe that
his underlings are the equals of the Second Person of
the Trinity, what does he wish to be considered
himself?
Annunciation. In the Lessons Proper for Holy
Days we read '* Annunciation of our Lady." The
Virgin Mary is therefore acknowledged in the P. B. as
the Madonna or our Lady. Scripture does not inform
us when the Annunciation occurred, but the day of
the Nativity having been already settled (see Christ-
mas), the Church of Rome, probably about the fifth
century, actually ventured to add that she was con-
ceived nine months previous on the 25th March.
This was probably one of the many cases of amalga-
mation with the Pagan sacred days, for the 25th of
March was anciently dedicated to Cybele, the mother
of the gods.
Anthems. Our Reformers who had seen the evil
of vicarious worship in the Roman Church left out all
mention of Anthems in the P. B. of 1549, and it was
not until a century after, in the time of Charles the
28 Anthems.
\
Second, that they were acknowledged by the insertion
in the P. B. of 1662, of a rubric, and this was the work
of that immoral and worldly minded man Archbishop
Sheldon and his clique who were determined in every
way to make the P. B. distasteful to the Puritans with
the avowed desire of driving them out of the church.
They even astonished the profligate king by styling
him, in the Prayer for Parliament, ** most religious,"
and Bishop Burnet tells us that the king's witty friends
" often asked him what must all his people think when
they heard him prayed for as their most religious
king."
The province of a choir is to lead and support the
song of a congregation, not to monopolize it as they do
in the anthems, and they should not be al lowed to
turn the House of God into a place of entertainment,
for it is folly to call singing by proxy, worship. It
was well remarked by Canon Bell, " that the nearer we
approach an ornate cathedral service the farther we
depart from the simplicity of the gospel."
' Our Church music should be congregational only ;
devotional, full of true religious feeling ; not sensuous
nor artistic, and then there will be no danger that the
multitude will mistake their pleasure in the melody of
song for true religion and be content to draw nigh
unto God with their lips, while their heart is far from
Him. There is no greater danger incident to an ela-
borate Ritual than that of 7)iistaking emotio?t for
religious feeling. The most careless and godless may
be moved to tears by the pathos of sweet music, or be
held breathless by the touching spell of eloquent
words. It is possible to be sentimental without being
pious."
If however our Churches are to be turned into
Ecclesiastical Music Halls, and we must have anthems,
then is it not too much to expect us to stand and listen
A nthems. 2 9
to the solo, duet and quartet? Why should we not
remain seated as in other music halls ? Must we stand
to pay due respect to the choir ?
The Evangelical CJmrcJinian says : " The quartette
choir and the anthem soloist are not conducive to the
worship of GOD, but rather tend to develop the critical
faculty which is altogether out of place in the House of
God ; " and adding that we ought to be as careful and
reverent in our singing as in praying or preaching says
truly " many persons will thoughtlessly repeat senti-
ments in hymns that they would not accept through
any other channel," and Canon Mozley's words alone
are sufficient to show that great caution is necessary.
He says " The writers of our Hymn Books adapt their
theory of the Divine Being and operations to the exi-
gences of the metre and the rhyme. They invoke
whatever they please and find convenient and they
abandon their theology at a moment's notice for the
sake of a happy fourth line."
The Pan Anglican Synod is now almost forgotten.
The Bishop of Delaware describing it said " One
hundred bishops were all brought together at St. Paul's
Cathedral. There we were to stand up and make our
profession of faith, and what a grand thing it would
have been to have had the bishops repeat the creed
together. Instead of which we stood up for ten
minutes and the choir sang an elaborate piece of music
which we could not follow."
If our memory serves us it was that pattern bishop
Dr. Lee who then filled the see of Delaware.
Philpot, the good Bishop of Worcester in his charge
in 1 880 said ** The SvO-called 'intoning ' of the minister
and the chanting of the psalms hinder rather than
help, the heavenward aspirations of the people ; " and
we have felt this ourselves and once when nearly dis-
tracted lifted up our head and saw the choir-master
30
A ntJiems.
marking time like the leader of an orchestra, to " incline
our hearts to keep this law."
Dr. Fraser, Bishop of Manchester, said " he knew
churches where large congregations would gather when
it was known a popular anthem was to be sung, or
where a popular singer was known to be taking part
in the service, or where some skilful player was about
to play a favourite voluntary on the organ, and where
without such attractions the congregation would not be
large," and on another occasion he said " the spirit
that drew people there was the same spirit that drew
them to Mr. Halle's concerts, and they wfent to hear it
because they could not hear one of Mr. Halle's concerts
on Sunday " — to which the bishop might have added
that they could hear the Sunday concert gratis !
Such churches are like the famous and fashionable
Dublin Cathedral which has long been known as
" Paddy's Opera."
Ten }'earsago Dr. Iredell, Bishop of Ohio, published
a description of a fearful anthem which we would
rather not repeat, but a surgeon's knif^ must sometimes
cut deep and it may still serve as the bishop intended
as a warning. But we must use blanks, for they mock-
ed and blasphemc^d that name which the Jews never
mention without adding *' Blessed be His Holy Name."
" And this " he said " was what they sang : " " .
. . is a Spirit ; ... is a Spirit ; and they
that worship Him, and they that worship Him, and
they that worship Him must worship Him in Spirit
and in truth ... is a Spirit; and they that wor-
ship Him ; ... is a Spirit; must worship Him ;
they must: must worship: ship Him; in Spirit and
in truth ; for the Father seeketh such (tenor) ; for the
(all loud) seeketh such, seeketh such, seeketh such to
worship Him. (Very softly) ... is a Spirit ;
(waxing louder) ... is a Spirit ; and they ; they
Anthems — Apostles Creed. 3^
that worship Him ; they ; and they; they that worship
Him must worship Him and (loud yellendo) THEY that
worship Him; and they; must; that worship Him
(tenor softly) must ; (contralto) worship ; (all) Him in
Spirit and in truth ; (all but tenor) for ; (all) the Father
seeketh such ; (bass) seeketh such ; (all softly) to wor-
ship Him ; to worship (sort of dying away) in Spirit
and it tru-u-u-th."
Wycliffe condemned the frivolity and artifice of the
church music of his day five hundred years ago as
being for *' jollity and pride," and that it stirred vain
men more to dancing than mourning, and warned the
" fools " that delighted in it that they should remem-
ber the sharp words of Austin : — " As oft as the song
liketh me more than doth the sentence sung, so oft I
confess that I sin grievously." (See Choral Services
and Siirpliced Choirs.)
Apostles' Creed. In the Rubric this is called the
" Apostles' Creed," while in the articles it is only said
to be " commonly called " the Apostles' Creed, but
would it not be more correct if styled the Italian or
Roman Creed, or better still, the Christian Creed, for
although it was a tradition even in the time of Rufinus
that it was framed by them in person, Dr. Hook
deems it necessary to give reasons for believing the
legend highly improbable and Humphrey says we are
not justified in receiving it, but how many myriads
have believed and do still believe it was composed by
them. We are told, however, that it was so called
because it contains the doctrines of the Apostles, but
did they believe that our most blessed Lord descended
into hell ? We follow the minister in saying " He
descended into hell," — but He did not do so, neither do
the two other creeds say so.
When he said " It IS FINISHED," His work was
32 Apostolic Constitution — Apostolical Succession.
done, and the same day he was in Paradise with the
penitent thief. Hades or Sheol is the region of the
Hfeless, and Paradise was understood by the Jews to
be that part of Hades where the spirits of the righteous
dead repose.
The earliest form of this Creed of which we have
any knowledge was used in the time of Rufinus, bishop
of Aquileia, A.D. 390, and does not mention hell,
" crucifix us sub Pontio Pilato et sepultus ; tertia die " —
(was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and buried ; the
third day — ). The words " He descended into hell"
are a later addition, as is also the word " Catholic."
(See Catholic^
Apostolic Constitutions. In the early ages of the
Clmrch of Rome these were attributed to Clement of
Rome, who was supposed to have committed them to
writing from the mouths of the Apostles. This has,
however, been completely disproved and it is nov/
generally believed by critics that they were chiefly
compiled during the second and third centuries. They
contain references to writers of the third and fourth
centuries, and a modern critic supposes them not to
have attained their present form until the fifth century.
Dr. Hook says, " The advancement of episcopal dig-
nity and power appears to have been the chief" design
of the forgery." The Apostolical Canons are writings
of a similar nature to the foregoing and are first
alluded to by name in the year 394.
Apostolical Succession. Every scholar has long
given up as a mere piece of papistic ignorance the
pretence that the Apostles were the prototypes of the
bishops, for the Apostolate ceased on the day that St.
John died at Ephesus. Dean Stanley says "The
Twelve Apostles whom He chose had no successors
Apostolical Succession. 33
like themselves. No second Peter, no second John,
no second Paul stepped into the places of those who
had seen the Lord Jesus. . . . The Seventy Dis-
ciples that went forth at their Lord's command into
the cities of Palestine were soon gathered to their
graves, and no order of the same kind or of the same
number came in their stead. They went out once,
and returned back to their Master to go out no more."
The case is thus summed up in Smith's Bible Diction-
ary. " It ceased, as a matter of course, with its first
holders — all continuation of it, from the first conditions
of its existence (cf. i Cor. ix. i.) being impossible.
The episcopus of the ancient churches co-existed with
and did not in any sense succeed the Apostles ; and
when it is claimed for bishops or any church officers
that they are their successors it can be understood
only chronologically and not officially."
And this we may well believe when we remember
what some of the early bishops were. Gregory of
Nazianzus, Bishop of Constantinople, who died in 389,
was a good man and an exception to the general rule.
This is what he says of the bishops of his day. We
now quote the bishop's account as given by Dr,
Stanley, Dean of Westminster in his Christian Insti-
tutions. At the Council of Antioch " a yell, rather
than a cry, broke from the assembled episcopate."
" They threw dust in his face ; they buzzed about him
like a swarm of wasps ; they cawed against him like
an army of crows. . . . Showing their tusks, as
if they had been wild boars.'
Again Gregory says " They are * illiterate, low-born,
filled with all the pride of upstarts fresh from the
tables of false accountants, peasants from the plough,
unwashed blacksmiths, deserters from the army and
navy still stinking from the holds of the ships.' "
" Jiut he is aware of the objection that the Apostles
3
34 Apostolical Siiccession.
might be said also to have been unlearned men. * Yes,'
he replies, as if anticipating the argument of the apos-
tolical or papal succession 'but it must be a real
Apostle ; give me one such, and I will reverence him
however illiterate.' ' But these,' he returns to the
charge, ' are time serving, waiting not on God but
on the rise and flow of the tides, or the straw in
thewind — angry lions to the small, fawning spaniels
to the great— flatterers of ladies — snuffing up the smell
of good dinners — ever at the gates not of the wise
but of the powerful — unable to speak themselves, but
having sufficient sense to stop the tongues of those
who can — made worse by their elevation — affecting
manners not their own — the long beard, the down-
cast look, the head bowed, the subdued voice — the
got-up devotee.' "
" Again Gregory says ' Councils, congresses, we
greet afar off, from which (to use very moderate
terms) we have suffered many evils.' ' I will not sit
in one of those Councils of geese and cranes. I fly
from every meeting of bishops, for I never saw any
good end of any such, nor a termination, but rather
an addition of evils.' "
Nearly broken-hearted Gregory resigned his bishop-
ric, and Dean Stanley says "He might, perhaps, have
acted a more dignified part had he buried in oblivion
all remembrance of the cause of his retirement. But
history has ratified the truth of the invectives which
his vanity or his righteous indignation extorted from
him."
At the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 449) when a mob
of monks appeared (we again quote Dean Stanley)
" Flavian, Archbishop of Constantinople, lay watching
for the moment to escape, when Dioscorus, the Arch-
bishop of Alexandria, seized him round the waist and
dashed him to the ground. Dioscorus kicked the
Apostolical Sticcession. 35
dying man on the sides and chest. The monks of
Barsumas struck him with their clubs as he lay on the
ground. Barsumas himself cried out in the Syrian
language, " Kill him, kill him." He expired from the
savage treatment in a few days."
This was prior to the schism between the Greek
and the Latin Churches.
The church in England was in no better condition.
Gildas was a bishop who wrote a century after the
Council of Ephesus, and his words are : —
" Britain hath priests, but they are unwise ; very
many that minister, but many of them impudent ;
clerks she hath, but certain of them are deceitful
raveners ; pastors (as they are called), but rather
wolves prepared for the slaughter of souls . .
instructing the laity, but showing withal most depraved
examples, vices and evil manners ; despising the com-
mandments of Christ and being careful with their
whole hearts to fulfil their lustful desires . . .
looking on the just, the poor and the impotent with
stern countenances and reverencing the sinful rich
men as if they were heavenly angels ; preaching with
their outward lips that alms are to be distributed to
the needy, but of themselves bestowing not one half-
penny . . . and after all these seeking rather
am^bitiously for ecclesiastical dignities than for the
kingdom of heaven . . . violently intruding them-
selves into the preferments of the church ; yea, rather
buying the same at a high rate . . ."
" For what is so wicked and so sinful as after the
example of Simon Magus, for any man with earthly
price to purchase the office of a bishop or a priest ;
but . . . they buy their deceitful and unprofitable
ecclesiastical degrees not of the apostles and their suc-
cessors, but of tyrannical princes, and their father
the devil." And with a final warning to " O ye enemies
36 Apostolical Succession.
of God, and not priests ! O ye traders of wickedness
and not bishops ! O ye betrayers and not successors
of the holy Apostles," he concludes with a prayer that
the Almif^ht)' GOD of all consolation and mercy may
preserve his few good pastors.
Bishops, or superintendents or overseers, for that is the
meaning of the Greek word, were the same as presbyters
or elders in the Apostolic times, when there were only
two orders, viz., bishops or presbyters and deacons.
They are not necessary for the being of a church and
Laud himself was rebuked by the University of Oxford
in 1604 for saying that there could be no church
without bishops, and it is to him in fact that we are
indebted for this doctrine, for when he presented him-
self for his B.D. degree he argued as was customary in
the School of Divinity, and Dr. Holland, the Regius
Professor, reproved him very severely as a seditious
person because he broached the novel and popish
opinion that there could be no church without bishops.
The word " novel " shows clearly the doctrine was
not recognized by our divines at that time.
Eusebius.the church historian, who died in 338, was
sa)'s Moshcim "a man of immense reading justly
famous for his profound knowledge in sacred litera-
ture." He endeavoured to complete the chain of
bishops and confessed that it was impossible. He
said he was utterly unable to find even the bare traces
of those who had gone before him save here and there
some slight marks and that he knew nothing of the
persons who labored with Peter and Paul except what
he had learnt from St. Paul's Epistles.
Eusebius was a bishop and bishops ought therefore
to believe his testimony. It is wilfully forgotten, or
else how is it explained away? Have we in this 19th
century any evidence that he was not aware of in the
4th, and if so by what miracle was it preserved }
Apostolical Succession. 37
From the earliest times bishoprics have been bought
and sold. The famous Ambrose, Bishop of Milan
(ob. 397) wrote that bishops were ordained in his day
without any qualification but that of paying a hundred
gold coins, and Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople
(ob. 407), who said that the number of bishops that
might be saved bore a very small proportion to those
who would be damned, deposed in one day no less
than six bishops who all confessed that they had
bought their bishoprics, and then sold the rite of ordi-
nation to reimburse themselves.
History, however, does not add what was done with
those presbyters who had bought their ordinations
from the six prelates.
Great stress is laid upon the Tactual Succession or
Laying on of Hands, but it was derived from the
Church of Rome who did not adopt it until nearly one
thousand years after Christ and abandoned it in 1439,
under the authority of the Council of Florence. It is
not mentioned in the P. B of 1552, and the words
" now committed unto thee by the imposition of our
hands" were introduced in 1662, by Sheldon.
How do the admirers of this doctrine bridge over the
first gap of 1000 years a?td the second gap from 143^
to 1662 ?
Bishops have studied divinity and must be aware of
this. How then can they conscientiously allow the
ceremony to be performed }
Does it not seem like a mockery 1 Three or more
bishops point with their fingers spread open and ex-
tended toward the head of the bishop elect, as if it was
intended to make the (must we say — ignorant and
superstitious) laity believe that thirty or more streams
of some magnetic or apostolical fluid were passing from
their fingers into the head of the bishop elect.
The celebrated ecclesiastical historian Bingham, who
38 Apostolical Succession.
died in 1723, did not attempt to prove the fable of
Apostolical Succession, declaring it to be an impossi-
bility to make an exact and authentic catalogue ; and
Archbishop Whately, who died in 1863, and many
others have exposed the absurdity of the doctrine, and
among them the late Dean Grasett declared honestly
and boldly in the Synod of Toronto that he did not
believe in it. It has not only been long since given
up by the German Lutheran Church but also by the
Episcopal ly ordered churches of Norway, Sweden and
Denmark.
There is not a single prelate who can trace up his
spiritual pedigree, although a few years since, a bishop,
since deceased, in a newspaper correspondence, offered
to show any one who would call upon him, a list of
bishops to the time of St. Peter, — which he could easily
have done as they have often been printed — but if
these lists were brought up in a Civil Court of Law
they would soon be demolished. They all cornmence
with the Bishops or Popes of Rome — the Catalogue of
the Pontiffs, and particularly with the so-called
" Liberian Catalogue'" on which they are all founded,
but the learned Cave called these all in question, say-
ing they had suffered various additions at various
hands, and interpolations from time to time, and the
Liberian in particular, and that the sentence respect-
ing the twenty-five years of St. Peter had no authority
earlier than the year 354, the year in which the first
Catalogue is said to have been compiled, but it is now
believed to be a sixth century production. Even the
Roman Archbishop Genebrand says that for nearly
one hundred and fifty years about fifty of the bishops
of Rome were apostates rather than Apostles (apos-
tatici quatius quam apostolici). During this time there
were two — sometimes more — popes, each of whom
excommunicated the other, and to this day no one
Apostolical Succession. 39
knows which are the so-called " true " popes and which
were the anti -popes. Two popes received the pope-
dom from the hands of princely courtezans. One was
self-appointed. One became pope in his eighteenth
year and another, by purchase, at twelve years of age.
One pope, Joan, was a woman, and it was never denied
until after the Reformation. When Huss was tried in
141 5, he said in his defence " Was not the church
without a ruler during the two years and five months
that Joan occupied the See of Rome ?" And this he
repeated, asking if we were to believe that this woman
pope was pure and immaculate ; and not one of the
three hundred and forty-one members of the Council,
twenty of whom were Cardinals, attempted to charge
him with making a false statement.
Baring-Gould calls the story of Joan a fable and
attributes it to the Protestants of the Sixteenth Cen-
tury, but Huss's charge alone is sufficient to refute
that, besides which her reign is recorded in the Nurem-
berg Chronicle, A.D. 1493, and the reform of Luther
dates from 15 17, but she is mentioned as early at least
as the eleventh century for Marianus Scotus, who
died in 1086, says she succeeded Pope Leo and reigned
two years, five months and four days. Her image
bearing her name, was also in its proper place among
the popes in the Cathedral of Siena, and the learned
French Historian Montfaucon, who was a Benedictine
monk, says that at the request of Pope Clement VHP
(i 592-1605) the Duke of Tuscany changed the name
of Joan into Zachary.
Plegmund, Archbishop of Canterbury in 891, was
ordained by Pope Formosus who was detested and his
corpse was thrown into the Tiber. Pope Stephen VL,
declared all his ordinances to be null and void, and yet
Archbishop Plegmund consecrated English bishops
for twenty-five years.
40 Apostolical Succession.
Chichley, Archbishop of Canterbury in 1414, conse-
crated EngHsh bishops for twenty-nine years. He
himself, however, received his episcopal orders from
Pope Gregory XII., who was an anti-pope, and was
deposed, having been declared by the Council of Con-
stance to be neither a pope nor a bishop.
At the Vatican Council in 1854, Bishop Strossmayer
denied the primacy of Peter, and said that Pope Mar-
cellinus (296-303) was an idolater who offered up
incense to Vesta in the temple of that goddess ; that
Pope Liberius (358) was an Arian who consented to
the condemnation of Athanasius ; that Pope John
XXII. (13 19) denied the imm^rtaHty of the soul, " I
grieve my venerable brethren," he continued, " to stir
up so much filth. I am silent over Alexander VI.
father and lover of Lucretia" — and used the words
" avaricious, incestuous, murdering and simoniacal
popes."
It is through this chaos .)f corruption that our
bishops claim their Apostolic^al Succession.
In our Homilies it is averred that the whole of
Christendom was sunk in idolatry for more than one
thousand years. How any man can reconcile this
Jact with the assertion that the apostolical purity of
doctrine was preserved among the bishops, priests and
deacons through whom Apostolic Succession is traced,
is too deep a m}-stery for ordinary understanding to
fathom.
As regards St. Peter, Ambrose said truly '* Faith is
the foundation of the Church ; and it ivas not said of
the flesh but of the faith of Peter " On this rock I will
build my church!" And Dean Alford, speaking
of the alleged episcopate of St. Peter, said ** His
twenty-five years' Popedom is the veriest and silliest
fable."
The Church Quarterly for July 1884, shows that
Apostilical SiiccessioJi. 41
there are fifty-eight flaws in the Papal Succession and
huge gaps for many years. Could an illegal pope
make legal bishops ? Popes consecrate alone. How
many did Pope Joan ordain .?
In a genealogical tree one case of illegitimacy de-
stroys the succession and there is no remedy, and there
is not a century in the past nineteen that there have
not been legions of spurious bishops — that is to say if
they claim an apostolical succession — for all who were
ordained by apostate bishops and their successors are
all illegitimate as regards that succession.
Look for instance at the list of English bishops.
The first bishop of Bangor was Deiniol Wyn, Daniel
the White or St. Daniel in 516, and not another is
named until Hervey in 1107. A gap of six centuries.
Llandaff commences in 522 with St. Dubritius, who
we are told lived to the age of 1 50, and was succeeded
by twenty-four others, names only, without even a
single date, to Gogwan in 982 when dates begin again.
St. David's. The first is St. David in 577, who lived
to the age of 140, and is followed by a string of forty-
six names in nearly six centuries — Christian names
only, a list of Toms, Dicks and Harrys, thus : —
Cenauc,
Eluid,
Cenen,
Morvail,
and so on, without a single tribal, landed or family
designation or father's name (as ap Howell, ap Rhys)
or sobriquet (as Daniel the White) or date to trace
them by until David Fitzgerald in 1147. St. Asaph's.
St. Kentigern, first bishop, died in 612, aged one hun-
dred and eighty-five years ! He was succeeded by
St. Asaph, no date given, and there is then a gap to
Gilbertus or Galfridus, A.D. 1143. Chichester com-
mences with Sigelmus in 733, followed by Alubritus,
42 Apostolical Succession.
761 ; Osa, 790, and nine more, names and dates only
to Ethelgarus in 980, of whom something seems to be
known, and there are several similar cases to these.
Of Scotland, Haydn, in his Book of Dignities, says,
" To present an exact account of the bishops of
Scotland is next to impossible. Almost all the
authors who mention them differ from each other so
much that correctness is extremely difficult to arrive
at."
Here also several are named only, without dates.
After the death of an Archbishop of St. Andrew's, the
metropolitan see, in 1503, King James IV. created his
natural son Alexander archbishop and metropolitan,
when a bo\' ; and a few }'ears later, while still a young
man, this Most Reverend Archbishop was killed while
fighting at the battle of Flodden in .1513.
In 1 6 10 Spottiswood, Archbishop of St. Andrew's,
and two others Scotch Presbyterians were consecrated
in London by the Bishops of London, Bath and Ely.
Andrews, Bishop of Ely, contended however that their
ordinations as presbyters was invalid, and that there-
fore those divines must go through the gradations of
deacon and priest before they could be consecrated,
but his objections were overruled.
The three Scottish bishops then consecrated others,
but there are no records of consecration of Scottish
bishops between 1662 and 1688 — twenty six years
Bishop Seabury, the first American bishop, was conse-
crated by this church in 1784.
Not a date is wanting in the Irish Lists however.
The archbishops of Armagh commence with St. Pat-
rick, A.D. 444, who is followed by fifty-two bishops,
names and dates only, to the first archbishop in 1152,
who may be considered an historical character, while
most of the preceding names and dates are undor.btedly
fabulous.
Apostolical Succession, 43
The See of Dublin is supposed to have been founded
by St. Patrick about the year 448, but the first named
bishop is Livernus, A.D. 633, followed by ten others
eight of whom have dates to 1095, when it became an
archbishopric, but the Rev. Professor Stokes says the
See dates from the eleventh century and calls those
who trace it back to St. Patrick, " Romancers of eccle-
siastical history."
Even since the Reformation it is said there are about
twenty English bishops of whose consecration there is
no record whatever. There is no record of the conse-
cration of Bishop Barlow, the principal consecrator of
Archbishop Parker in 1559 ; nor are the names known
of the consecrators of Archbishop Jones of Dublin, as
Bishop of Meath in 1584. From him the present Irish
episcopal succession is derived.
Staunton in his Church Dictionary, New York, 1 849,
said of Uninterrupted Succession in the American
Church, " without it, ordination confers none but
humanly derived powers ; and what those are worth,
the reader may estimate when we tell him that, on
proof of a real fracture in the line of transmission
between the first Bishops of the American Church and
the inspired Apostles, the present Bishops will freely
acknowledge themselves to be mere laymen, and
humbly retire from their posts," and Dr. Littledale
said, " In order to exercise the sacerdotal functions we
claim for ourselves and the Anglican priesthood, a
regular commission in direct and regular process
by the laying on of hands of bishops from the
Apostles."
Are not the foregoing '' real fractures." and where
is the " direct and regular pro^ ess ? "
There is not a single bishop in the Roman, English
or American Church who can prove that there is not
a flaw in his spiritual pedigree. (See Bishop.)
4\ Athanasia7i Creed.
Athanasian Creed. This was formerly supposed
to be written by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria,
who died in 375, but it never existed in the language
in which he spoke and wrote, and is now known to be
an ecclesiastical fabrication. The first undoubted
mention of it, according to Waterland, is in A.D. 760.
In the attempted Revision in the Reign of William
the Third, in 1689, it was proposed to explain the
damnatory clauses and this was renewed in the Con-
vocation of Canterbury in 1879.
The American Church omitted this creed entirely in
their P. B. in 1789 and the R. E. Church of the U. S.
and the R. E. Church of Canada followed the example.
The English P. B. Revision Society and the R. E.
Church of Great Britain and Ireland omitted the three
damnator}' clauses and the obligatory rubric. The
Irish Church (1878) retained the creed but omitted the
rubric, so that no one is obliged to read it.
Archbishop Tillotson condemned it two hundred
years ago. Chillingworth went so far as to say that
" the damning sentences are not only false, but in a
high degree presumptuous. '
George the Third never would stand up when it was
read, " showing," says Goldwin Smith, " by this silent
protest against its parade of paradox and its reckless
denunciation, the spirit of a true Christian," and in
our own century it has been condemned by Archbishop
Tait, Dean Stanley, Dean Payne Smith and many
others.
Archbishop Longley declared in the presence of the
whole bench of bishops that no one accepts or believes
in its terms as they now stand, and the late Bishop
Lonsdale habitually sat down whenever it was read as
a silent but significant protest against its use.
A worthy country clergyman was accused and pre-
sented to Bishop Stanley, father of the late Dean, for
Athanasian Creed — Aitricidar Confession. 45
refusing to read this creed. The bishop laid his hand
upon a Bible, and referring to John viii., asked the
accusers, " Will you be good enough to explain the
sense in which you understand this creed ? " They
began to go out one after the other, and the prelate
was left alone with the minister to whom he said,
" Neither do I condemn you."
In the Preliminary Observations to the Spanish
P. B. it is said *' we also accept the (so-called) Athan-
asian Creed as containing a true definition of the
Catholic Faith, but do not hold it appropriate for use
during public worship, nor was it used as such in the
ancient Spanish Church." It is fervently to be hoped
that they do not all accept the damnatory clauses,
which declare the damnation of myriads of our fellow
Christians who do not accept it, and moreover bind us,
on the same awful peril to ourselves, to believe in the
damnation of others.
Auriculap Confession. This is a most fearful
subject.
An unmarried man asks young girls questions such
as not only a father, but even a mother would not dare
to ask their child.
But they are frightened into it and most falsely
told that they must confess to the priest " because
God when he was upon earth gave to the Priests, and
to them alone, the divine power of forgiving man their
sins " — and " you must tell the Priest all the sins that
you remember to have committed ; God absolutely
requires this " — but the article in " Books for the
Young." No. I. Confession. (London, Palmer, 1872)
is too long to quote here.
The leading questions upon the seventh Command-
ment teaching the previously innocent one immoral
ideas, that would otherwise never have entered her
46 Auricular Confessio?i,
head, for as Dr. Magee, Archbishop of York, says :
'* It is impossible, however prudent the priest may be,
to avoid instilling vice by the cotifessionair Each
question, step by step, is more searching than the last,
and as the penitent is warned that a single omission
vitiates all, the weak one reveals her inmost thoughts,
if married perhaps telling thoughts or deeds that she
would not dare to confide even to her husband.
When once the confession is made the priest becomes
the master, the DIRECTOR, for he has acquired all
the secrets of the family, and the penitent, man or
woman, can never look at him again as an indepen-
dent being. And moreover can never feel confident
that the priest, who is a frail human being, may
not disclose the secret, and that this is often done is
undoubted, for not only priests who have been con-
verted, but la}'men as well, have stated that they have
heard priests at the dinner table, over their wine, jest
upon what they had heard in the morning in the
confessional.
Mill says : " Of all the contrivances to enthrall man-
kind and to usurp the entire command of them, that
of Auricular Confession appears the most impudent
and the most effectual. That one set of men could
persuade all other men that it was their duty to come
and reveal to them everything which they had done,
and everything which they meant to do, would not be
creditable if it were not proved by the fact. The
circumstances rendered the clergy masters of the secrets
of every family. ... In this manner the clergy
became masters of the whole system of human life''
The Right Hon. the Earl of Harrowby, K G., in a
speech delivered in 1874, said :—" Is it possible that
any man should enter into the holy bonds of matri-
mony, if he knows that his bride has already acquired
the habit of confiding every thought of her mind,
Auricular Confession. 47
every feeling of her heart, to another, — to a stranger ?
Or even if he is in doubt whether such is not to be the
case hereafter ? She is indeed, for his sake, to leave
father and mother, but she is to take with her one
whose authority is more absolute than theirs."
The Duke of Buckingham, in his " Private Diary,"
relates the following : — " / know (the italics are the
Duke's), a case where a Carbonaro had hid his diploma
and arms in a part of his house where he had built them
up. Imprudently he had entrusted his wife with the
secret. Oppressed by the weight of it, she communi-
cated it, under the seal of confession, to her confessor.
He was villain enough to betray his penitent and her
husband to the police. The next night the police
came to the very spot marked out by the woman who
had thus sacrificed her husband. The diploma and
arms were found, and both husband and wife were
carried off to prison, where they now remain." This
was in Naples in 1827.
The director of a late King of Spain, and who wasalso
the Queen's confessor, when the king upon a certain
occasion declined to comply with his requests, inso-
lently continued to press them, reminding the king, " I
have your God^ in my hand and your queen at my
feet."
" Patrick," said a priest to an Irishman, " how much
hay did you steal ? " " Well," replied Pat. " I may as
well confess to your reverence for the whole sta k, for
my wife and I are going^to take the rest of it the first
dark night."
A few years ago a Scotch^ gentleman gave evidence
in the Private Bills Committee of the Quebec Legisla-
ture conflicting with that given by his minister, the
Rev. Gavin Lane. A P>ench member hurried over to
'â– z.d'., the wafer-god !
48 Auricular Confession.
him, and with a face full of warning, said, " Wait my
fren till he get you in de confessional, and he make
you pay up for dat."
The abominable (\UQS\.\ons, especially npoti the subject of
purity, are even put to little children. They are printed
in The Priest in Absolution. The R. C. Monsignor Capel
in correspondence with Canon Liddon in the London
Times, January i6th, 1875, announced publicly that
the Ritualistic Priest in Absolution was an adaptation
from one of the R. C books on Auricular Confession.
Scholars can find the questions asked (in Latin) in
the R. C. published works of Dens and Liguori, and a
few years ago Lord Oranmore had extracts from
the equally vile Ritualistic book printed for the use of
Parliament.
Were they printed here, we should render ourselves
liable to prosecution for publishing obscene literature.
The first part of this book was published by Mas-
ters, London. The second part has no publisher's
name, but contains the following notice : — -" To pre-
vent scandal, arising from the curious or prurient mis-
use of a book which treats of spiritual diseases, it has
been thought best that the sale should be confined to
the clergy, who desire to have at hand a sort of vade
mecuni, for easy reference in the discharge of their
duty as confessors," So that, according to their owm
showing, an English clergyman is to have for his guide
in the confessional a book which to prevent scandal,
must be circulated in secret, is unfit to bear the name
of a respectable publisher and which implies absolute
pollution in the so-called priest. It was well said that
if the questions contained therein to be whispered in
the ears of young women by clergymen of the Eng-
lish Church were proclaimed upon the house-top, they
would heat to the boiling point the blood of the Eng-
lish people.
Auricular Confession. 49
In the Roman Breviary sins are divided into cardinal
(deadly) and venial (slight), and among the venial is
lying ! This sometimes works both ways, for it is told
of an Irishman who had stolen a cheque for a large
sum in pounds shillings and pence, that he confessed
only for the shillings and pence, (of course paying
accordingly,) keeping back the pounds, and received
absolution for his robbery.
The Romish priests generally receive confessions in
public places, in churches, but the Ritualistic " priests "
hear them in vestries and private rooms, and in Eng-
land it is said that young women are closeted with a
" priest," sometimes for an hour or more at a time !
One very important question, seldom, if ever omitted,
is " Have you told any one what zuas said in confes-
sion ? "
Think of this, ye mothers, who have not already
been caught in the toils.
The meddling priest, an unmarried man, is to be a
dealer in confidences between your daughter and him-
self, which are forbidden to you her mother !
^Jt may appear strange to some that even absolution
must be paid for in the Church of Rome, but every-
thing has its price there (see Lent), although not so
boldly charged now, and especially in Protestant
countries. We remember hearing years since of a
Roman gentleman who had paid four hundred scudi
(dollars) for the privilege to marry his wife's sister.
In Spain, about twenty-five years ago, when General
Prim declared for the dethronement of Queen Isabella,
it was regarded by many as the commencement of a
Republic. Accordingly the Revolutionists in Church
and State took heart, and Carrasco, who might be
called the Latimer of Spain, boldly exposed the abuses
of religion. '* You, O Romish priests," said he, " tell
us that baptism from your hands is necessary, and
4
50 Auricular Co?ifessio7t — Baptism.
without this rite the Httle children of the great Spanish
people will be in flames to all eternity. This we
believed, or attempted to believe, once ; but now we
deny it. However, supposing that to be true which
you say, how do you act ? The child of a poor water-
carrier — a man next door to a beggar — is brought to
you. ' Give this poor baby,' cry the parents, * the
holy water and the sacred words.' * Give me two
dollars,' you reply. Two dollars ! How can they
find two dollars ? They have not so much as two
reals. Is, then, the child baptised ? No : it must
wait without a name and without grace until you have
been paid the two dollars. Is that the religion of
Christ ? Is that a specimen of holy love to man for
God's sake .^ Another day, the wives of these poor
Spaniards die, and they, trusting creatures, were your
best friends. Will you get them out of Purgatory ?
Again there must be the two dollars, always the two
dollars, or else these women must remain in tor-
ments."
" Confess your faults one to another " — faults,
not sins (^ paraptomata not amartias James v. 1 6), and
confess your silts to GOD. He can forgive sins and
He alone.
Baptism. Bishop Hooper, the martyr, said, " Al-
though baptism be a Sacrament to be received and
honorably used of all men, yet it sanctifieth no man.
And such as attribute the remission of sin to the ex-
ternal sign do offend."
The ordinance has no power to regenerate man's
sinful nature, nor docs regeneration necessarily ac-
company its administration.
Our Lord said " Suffer little children to come unto
Me." Romanists think differently however. A R. C.
priest told his hearers that hell was paved with the
Baptism. 5 1
skulls of unbaptized infants, but in Switzerland, in the
Canton Valais, about five years ago, a more tender-
hearted one, in a sermon about baptism told his peo-
ple " I cannot say where the babes have gone to, who
have died unbaptized for le bon Dieu has not quite
decided what to do with them ! "
The horrible rubric forbidding the Burial Service
over the unbaptized was for the first time introduced
into our P. B. in what Dean Stanley called " the dis-
astrous epoch of 1662. . . . till then it had been
permitted, and (the rubric) still, through the influence
of the Southern Convocation, maintains its place."
If these unbaptized infants are fit for heaven why
are the words of the Burial Service too sacred to be
used over their remains ? Thank God these little
ones will fall into different hands in the next world
than those of Dr. Sheldon and his revisers.
The Convocation of 1603 forbade Fathers to be
Godfathers in baptism, the consequences of which has
been that not only are strangers called upon but even
the sextons have been sponsors for hordes of infants
whom they never expected to see again, and among
the educated classes how many septuagenarians can
remember the names even of those for whom in the
preceding half century they have taken the solemn
vow — and given the parcel gilt cup —the most import-
ant part with some ? Is not the exhortation in such
cases a mockery ? At the Savoy Conference in 1661,
the Presbyterians objected to this Canon, and now
after holding out for two centuries, we churchmen are
at last accepting the suggestion of our Presbyterian
brethren, for at the Convocation of Canterbury in 1879
it was decided that parents may be sponsors.
Although our sponsors answer for us, there is no
rubric requiring that they themselves shall be Chris-
tians, and yet they are allowed to become sureties for
5 2 Baptism.
us, as if one human soul, even of a believer, can be
surety for another.
The consecration of the water, "Sanctify this Water"
was introduced in the time of Charles the Second,
having been omitted in the Second Book of Edward.
The Puritans always protested against the sign of
the cross in baptism, and the American Church in
1789 added a rubric permitting it to be omitted if de-
sired. The R. E. Church say the sign is not to be
made except when desired, but in the Revised P. B.
all reference to the sign is expunged.
Strange to say however it is retained in the Irish
P. B. although it has therein been deemed necessary
not only to print an - apologetical note, but also the
whole of the Canon of 1603, the false logic of which is
unparalleled.
" The honour and dignity of the name of the Cross
begat a reverend estimation even in the Apostles'
time {^for aiigJit that is knozvn to the contrary) of
the sign of the Cross, etc."
Although they thus defend the use of the sign, they
dropped from the Calendar the Invention of the cross
(May 3) and Holy Cross Day (Sept. 14). The 36th
Canon forbids crosses on the Communion Table, or
on the covering thereof or behind the table, and the
39th forbids carrying any cross in processions. The
5th Canon is " No minister or other person during the
time of Divine service shall make the sign of the cross
sa7'c ivJicre prescribed in the rubric, i.e., in the Baptis-
mal Service ! Is this consistent, and why should the
innocent babes alone be branded with the sign of the
accursed tree when it is prohibited everywhere else ?
Baptism, in a {qvj words, is an admission into the
visible Church of Christ. The baptized become mem-
bers of the Church militant, hereafter to be translated,
// faithfnl, into the Church triumphant. (See Font.)
St. Barnabas — Bishops. 53
Barnabas, St. Nothing whatever is known about
this Apostle except what is recorded in the N. T., the
last date being about A.D. 59. but in the year 478
after four centuries, there was a dispute between
Peter of Antioch and Anthemius of Cyprus as to
which should hold the See of Cyprus, which was
craftily settled by the latter who professed to have
found the body of Barnabas, whereupon the Emperor
Zeno decided in his favour. The eleventh of June
was consecrated to this saint, and to this day our
church observes the date because forsooth it was de-
clared the saint's day by a Greek Emperor in the fifth
century. (See All Saints.)
BaPtholomew, St. The N. T. says very little about
this saint. According to the Greek Church he was
martyred June 11, and his relics were found Aug. 25.
The Armenian Church commemorates him on the 25th
Feb. and 8th Dec, the Abyssinian, June 11 and Nov.
19, and the Church of England, Aug. 14. (See All
Saints.)
Benedicite. This is taken from the Apocrypha
which according to the Articles is uncanonical ! If it
is not fit to be included in the Bible, why should it be
allowed in the P. B. ? Why should we invoke " Priests "
and " Spirits and Souls," and pray to three dead men ?
It is a Greek addition to the third chapter of Daniel
and is universally admitted to be a spurious produc-
tion of much later date. Did the Irish Church not
know this in 1878, when they retained it in their
P. B.?
Bishops- Episcopacy, as already shown under
Apostolical Succession, is not of Divine Appointment,
neither do bishops stand in the place of the Apostles,
54 Bishops.
but old superstitions die hard and this still exercises
an unhealthy influence on the mutual relations of the
Church of the Reformation. The bishop, as we find
him now, is the creation of post-apostolic times. The
presbyter-bishops were the only primitive bishops and
it is only in later times that the diocesan bishops have
quite swallowed and reduced to subjection the order
of Presbytery.
The Dean of Canterbury lately speaking on this
point adverted to the hackneyed quotation of Ignatius
" Do nothing without the bishop," and said that it
simply meant " Do nothing without the incumbent "
and was addressed to the whole church, advising them
always to consult their pastor.
As TJie Rock said, " Some of our less learned, and
let us say, less wise, modern bishops try to make out
that there were bishops in the time of Timothy. But
this, like many other illusions, is doomed to vanish
away. Diocesan bishops may be very useful officers,
but they are just as much, or just as little, of Divine
origin as any officer of State. The N. T. at any rate,
knows them not. The greatest living (this was in
1887) authorities on the subject of episcopacy are Dr.
Lii^htfoot, the learned Bishop of Durham, and Dr.
Hatch, the Vice-Principal of St. Mary's Hall, Oxford.
No one should engage in a controversy regarding
episcopacy without carefully studying their writings
on the subject."
Hierome (Jerome), who died in 420, and zvhoin we
quote as an autJiority in our XXXIX. Articles, denied
the superiority of bishops to presbyters by Divine
right, and states it as a historical fact that the creation
of bishops took place, not at once, but by degrees —
paulatim, i e.^ by little and little. That their first ele-
vation over others was a human contrivance, and that
the first bishops were made by the presbyters them-
Bishops. 5 5
selves, and consequently could neither have nor com-
municate any authority above that of presbyters ; and
five centuries ago Wycliff, the Morning Star of the
Reformation, rejected Episcopacy as a distinct order
in the Church, affirming that in the Apostles' time the
two orders of presbyters and deacons were sufficient,
and that the numerous distinctions which existed in
his time were the inventions of men and served but to
augment their worldly pride.
Three consecrators at least are considered neces-
sary to secure a legal and true succession, so that one
at least should be a true bishop, thus owning it to be
a matter of doubt; but in the early British Church, one
alone was sufficient and it was the same in Scotland
and Ireland, and in the latter country their number
was enormous. At one time they were believed to
have reached seven hundred, and according to Green
one bishop wandered through the country with a pet
cow at his heels without any support save from the
fees he charged for ordination. Who kept the records
of the ordinations of these seven hundred bishops ?
Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury (ob. 1089), in a
letter to Torlogh O'Brien, King of Southern Ireland,
complains most bitterly of the Celtic irregularities,
among which were that bishops were consecrated by
one bishop, and that holy orders were given by the
Celtic bishops for money.
Mosheim says " the barefaced impudence of the
sacerdotal orders in buying and selling benefices, ex-
ceeded all measure, and almost all credibility, and
about this time (i ith cent.) he quotes from the Gallia
Christiafia, published by the Benedictine monks, a
public act by which Bernard, a viscount, and Frothe-
rius, Bishop of Alby in Aquitaine, grant or rather sell,
openly, to Bernard Aisnard and his son, the bishop-
ric of Alby, reserving to themselves a considerable
56 Bishops.
part of its revenues. This act is followed by another
in which Count Pontius bequeaths to his wife and
children this same bishopric.
Nor did matters improve as centuries rolled on, for
in 15 18, according to D'Aubigne, the Venetian envoy
Correro, writing from Paris, says " The King began to
give away the bishoprics with a liberal hand at the
solicitation of the Court ladies and to bestow abbeys
upon his soldiers so that at the Court of France a
trade was carried on in bishoprics and abbeys as at
Venice in pepper and cinnamon."
King John (1199-1216) sold bishoprics to the high-
est bidder. It may be said that this was before the
Reformation, but Henry VIII., appointed bishops,
who by their commissions were to exercise their func-
tions during his royal pleasure only. Edward VI.,
more discreetly appointed them to hold their sees
" during good behavior " — and it would be well if we
had such a law now.
Queen Elizabeth made Capt. David Lyon of the
Royal Navy, bishop of Cork in 1583. From his quar-
ter-deck he stepped at once into the bishop's throne !
And when she demanded some of the church lands of
the bishop of Ely, upon the latter declining she wrote
as follows " Proud prelate ! you know what you were
before I made you what you are now. If you do not
immediately comply with my request by I will
unfrock you. Elizabeth." The bishop did obey im-
mediately and saved his frock.
Sheldon, Archbishop of Canterbury (ob. 1677) ^^^
as immoral a man as his royal master Charles the
Second, and commonly spoke of religion as a matter
of policy and an engine of government. Blackburn,
Archbishop of York (ob. 1743) was a pirate in early
life. He became archbishop during the reign of
George the Second, and as it is known another prelate
Bishops, 57
paid Lady Yarmouth, that King's favorite, five thou-
sand pounds for a bishopric — that Doctors of Divinity
bribed Mrs. Clarke, favorite of the Duke of York to
use his influence with his father Georg-e the Third, for
bishoprics (so scandalous was the case that Parlia-
ment enacted a law in 1809 declaring the brokerage of
offices, either in the Army, the CJiurch or the State to
be a crime highly penal), and that advowsons were
until a very few years past as openly advertised* and
sold as calves or cabbages, and are still quietly sold —
may we not with reason suppose that Blackburne
bought his preferment in the Church with the Spanish
doubloons he collected \x\ the West Indies? He is
said to have retained the vices of his youth (a sailor's
vices) even when he became archbishop, and on ac-
count of his passion for the fair sex (to use a common
expression) it was jestingly said of him that he gained
more hearts than souls. Walpole calls him " the jolly
old archbishop." He was bishop of Exeter and after-
wards archbishop of York for 27 years. His life was
ventilated some years ago in " Notes and Queries."
Archbishop Stone who died in 1747, was considered
the hardest drinker in Ireland.
Middleton, Bishop of St. David's, was deprived in
1592, for publishing a forged will, and Watson, an-
other bishop of the same see, was deprived for simony
and other crimes, in 1699. The publications of Fleet-
wood, Bishop of Ely (ob. 1723), were condemned by
Parliament to be burned by the common hangman.
Mansel, Bishop of Bristol (ob. 1820), was celebrated
*Only ten years ago, in 188 1, at the sale of a preferment in England
which the then incumbent attended out of curiosity, the auctioneer
(not knowing who was in the room) when praising his wares ( I), said
that the purchaser would soon come into possession as the present in-
cumbent was a very old man with one foot in the grave already, upon
which the old incumbent stamped tirst one foot upon the ground, and
then the other, calling out " which foot is it ?"
5 8 Bishops,
throughout the continent, as Miss Pardoe says, for his
lavish expenditure and his liaisons with the Countess
of Lichtcnau, the mistress of the King of Prussia, and
with others. Napoleon said he had as many debts as
brains, and added • " Every English bishop is noto-
rious for his sensuality and dissipation." Probably
the Emperor had heard of the archiepiscopal routs and
card parties of Archbishop Cornwallis, in whose days
the claret on the table was so excellent that digni-
taries were not infrequently seen under it, and to
whom George the Third, who did not approve of such
convivial parties at Lambeth Palace, wrote such a
sharp letter. His threat bore the same significance,
although in politer language, as that of Queen Eliza-
beth to the Bishop of Ely.
Bishop Christopher Wordsworth, at his visitation
held in Nottingham in 1882, said that a clergyman
who had been nominated to an English bishopric —
that of Gloucester — was justly objected to by some in
England, on account of his Socinian opinions; and he
was sent to Ireland and made Bishop of Derry.
The bishop of Clogher fled the kingdom in 182 1,
having been guilty of the same crime (Romans I. 27)
for which the Right Reverend (!) John Atherton, Lord
Bishop of Waterford was hanged in 1636. In Haydn's
Book of Dignitaries, the words are "hanged for bes-
tiality," and only in 1878, the aged bishop of Michi-
gan, U.S.A., was deposed for immorality. We might
fill pages but will not further disgust the reader. It
is advisable however to say thus much for the informa-
tion of those who consider that bishops are necessary
for the very existence of a church and who believe
with Canon Liddon that the validity of our chief
means of communication with our most blessed Lord
in the Holy Supper depends upon an Apostolic Suc-
cession.
Bishops. 59
Perhaps one of the most extraordinary points in
the history of the so-called (or self-styled ?) '' Succes-
sors of the Apostles," is that about a dozen of them
were created by Scotch noblemen ! An English prelacy
was private property for over four centuries and lat-
terly within our own days belonged to a Duke, not
even a Royal nor an English one, but to a Scotch Duke
who whether Presbyterian or even Mohammedan if he
chose, could appoint an English bishop.
The Isle of Man with all royalties and regalities,
together with the patronage of the Bishoprick, was
granted by Henry the Fourth (1399-1413) to Sir John
Stanley, whose descendant James Stanley, Earl of
Derby left a daughter and heiress who married the
second Earl of Atholl and at the death of the second
Duke of Atholl in 1764, without male heirs, the pat-
ronage devolved upon his daughter —
Lady Charlotte Murray, wJio then had the right to
create an EnglisJi bishop !
She married her cousm the third Duke and the
Dukes of Atholl continued to nominate the bishops of
Sodor and Man to the King, who sent them to the
Archbishop of York for consecration, and it is only
within less than half a century that the Duke sold his
rights to Government. Although duly ordained pre-
lates they were bishops only however, and not Lords
of Parliament, not holding from the king himself.
In the Parliament of 1836 no less than ninety-two
members voted for the exclusion of bishops from the
House of Lords, and in that of 185 1 it was stated that
immense amounts of public property had been appro-
priated by Protestant prelates to their own private
purposes and that the majority of the Episcopal Bench
had grossly falsified returns.
They might have referred, for instance, to Brownlow
North, Bishop of Winchester (ob. 1820), who it is
6o Bishops.
said netted one and a half million pounds ($7,500,000)
besides quartcrin^^ his sons, sons-in-law and nephews
on the Church. He actually installed one of his sons
in two diocesan offices when the boy was only seven
years old, and of course drew the salary while a deputy
performed the work.
Archbishop Manners Sutton (of Canterbury) died in
1828. Dr. Lushington estimated his revenues at
;^32,ooo or $160,000 a year. One of the Trench's, the
last Archbishop of Tuam, (it is now a bishopric) re-
ceived ^^17,326, or $86,630 a year, and had only 3,000
Protestant families to look after.
The present Archbishop of Canterbury, one of the
two Provinces and part therefore only of England,
has ;^ 1 5,000 a year and two palaces, while the Prime
Minister of the British Empire has only ;^"5,ooo and
no palace !
They manage matters differently in Russia. The
revenue of the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg is ;^8oo
a year. The archbishops have i^6oo and the bishops
^^â– 500.
In one of the leading London papers {Daily Nezvs,
Nov. 25, 1886) it was stated that the late Bishop
of Rochester sold the tithes of a parish to provide a
marriage portion for his daughter ! The non-resi-
dent layman being compelled to provide for the
" cure of souls " out of his two thousand pounds a
year tithes, first let the vicarage house and then ap-
pointed a clergyman at the magnificent salary of
one hundred pounds a year to do the work.
One way they formerly had was to grant long
leases at a vcr}- low rent, say one or two hundred
pounds a year on consideration of a bonus of, say
one or two thousand pounds or more, cash doivn
thus leaving their successors saddled with these low
rents, and this was in vogue until Parliament found
Bishops. 6 1
it necessary to deprive them of the power of granting
leases for a term of years.
Sidney Smith, a canon of St. Paul's, said " Bishops
are but men ; not always the wisest of men ; not
always preferred for eminent virtues and talents, nor
for any good reason whatever known to the public.
They are almost always devoid of striking and inde-
corous vices, but a man may be very shallow, very
arrogant and very vindictive, though a bishop, and
pursue with unrelenting hatred a subordinate clergy-
man whose principles he dislikes and whose genius he
fears. ... I have seen in the course of my life,
as the mind of the prelate decayed, wife-bishops,
daughter-bishops, butler-bishops, and even cook and
housekeeper-bishops."
This was written half a century ago and have mat-
ters improved since ? The proverb says " Hishops
possess every virtue but resignation " and we ourselves
remember a wife and daughter's bishop. The old
lord held on, for the sake of the stipend of course, long
after he was able to do much more than sign his name,
and the ladies made the appointments to the bene-
fices, and even now ladies have more power than
is generally supposed, for at the time of the ap-
pointment of Bishop Festing, The Rock said " Pro-
fane rumor has it that Lady Salisbury administers
the Premier's episcopal patronage."
Complaints have often been made in England of
the low origin of many of the bishops who cannot
bear their sudden elevation. When the present
Archbishop of Dublin, Lord Plunkett, was candidate
for the Bishoprick of Meath, one reason adduced in
his favor in the Irish papers was that he was born in
the purple, and his head therefore would not be turned
by being " My Lorded."
A London paper stated lately that the present
62 BisJiops.
Bishop of London never shakes hands with his Lon-
don clergy.
In 1874, a Wesleyan clergyman directed a tomb-
stone to be put up in a churchyard in Lincolnshire,
inscribed " in loving memory of Annie, daughter of the
Rev. H. Keet, Wesleyan Minister." The vicar of the
parish forbade its erection, giving no reasons. Mr.
Keet then appealed to Bishop Wordsworth who refused
to recognize Mr. Keet either as " Reverend " or as
" Minister," and actually allowed the matter to be
brought up in a Court of Law where pride had a
wholesome fall, the prelate losing the case, and the
papers said it was rather from the Anglican than the
Wesleyan that the title Rev. ought to be substracted.
Are we not blessed with too many titles in our
Church } The Presbyterians manage their affairs with
a Moderator and Clerks only ; the Methodists, a
General Superintendent, President and Secretaries.
And look at ourselves — Archbishops (Field Mar-
shall), Bishops (Generals), Deans (Colonels), Arch-
deacons (Lieutenant-Colonels), Canons (Majors), Ru-
ral Deans (Captains), and the " inferior clergy " (we
use the word applied to them by their own superiors),
the rank and file, and the bishop appoints his slaves,
for such many of them are, all looking to him for titles
or preferment.
Did His Grace the Most Reverend James, Lord
Archbishop of Jerusalem, or the Right Reverend Paul,
Lord Bishop of the Gentiles, require such a staff?
What would be said in the Army if a General could
appoint all the Colonels, Majors, Captains, etc.
The late bishop of Saskatchewan had twelve mini-
sters in his diocese all of whom were missionaries and
two only had taken University degrees. There was
no cathedral but he gave himself the additional title
of dean and appointed three canons, one honorary
Bishops. 63
canon, two rural deans and a bishop's chaplain who
was also a canon, so that one half of his army were
officers and the other half privates ! His successor
signs himself '' Saskatchewan and Calgary." What
right have colonial bishops to territorial distinctions ?
There is no established church and he is not bishop
of all the backwoodsmen, half breeds and Indians
there, but only of such as belong to the Episcopal
Church. The signature of one of the West Indian
Bishops was very ludicrous " H. Barbadoes and the
Western Islands."
In the United States, Bishops retain their own
names. We do not hear of a John Massachusetts or
of a James Pennsylvania.
We saw not long sincea sturdy bishop getting out
of a railway carriage assisted by two elderly clergy-
men who helped " Your Lordship " out of the car
more carefully than they would have assisted their
wives. One carried " Your Lordship's " dressing bag,
and the other carried "Your Lordship's" overcoat and
remembering that we had seen priests kiss the foot of
the Bishop of Rome, we could not help wondering
whether had " Your Lordship's " shoes required black-
ing they would have divided the honor. Was there not
a Canonry in the market ?"
We felt mortified as on the platform were many
whom we in our overweening pride stigmatize as dis-
senters who must have noticed this toadyism.
A few months ago the Bishop of Toronto created at
one batch nearly a couple of dozen canons ! Six of
them however, probably remembering the words of
the Lord Jesus (Matt, xxiii. 7.) did not snap at the
* Cardinals kiss the Pope's hand, archbishops and bishops his knee,
and abbots and inferior clergy, with the laity the cross embroidered on
his satin slipper.
64 Bishops.
bait, not wishing- to be called of men Canon,
Canon !
Besides titles to distribute, bishops have too many-
presentations and still they are not satisfied. The
late Bishop Selwyn in 1883, refused to consecrate a
church in Ashbourne, forcing its frequenters to turn
Free Churchmen, simply because Mr. Wright, the
founder, declined to place the patronage in the bishop's
hands ; and we remember another case where another
bishop tried the same game, but when the people
theatened to join the R. E. Church he quietly sub-
mitted.
It was an English bishop (Stoneham) who said
" The laity hold the purse-strings and must be con-
sulted."
In Scotland where the Presbyterian is the Estab-
lished Church, ours is only tolerated, and we are dis-
senters. There is no Episcopal territorial jurisdiction
there, and therefore no legal Episcopal dioceses.
There are seven bishops who are not lords, but are ad-
dressed simply as Bishop Brown or Bishop Smith.
There are also English Protestant Episcopal congre-
gations there, but they have no bishop, neither can an
English bishop cross the frontier to exercise jurisdic-
tion over them and those who desire confirmation must
seek it in England, but fortunately the rubric shows it
is not necessary in such cases.
Colonial bishops call themselves lords, to which they
have no right whatever, for as in Scotland there is no
territorial jurisdiction in the colonies and lord is an
English feudal title only. About a century ago when
the first bishop was sent to Canada he called himself
*' Lord Bishop," claiming precedence of almost every
one in the Colony. It was looked upon with so much
dislike that the legislature adopted a resolution by a
majority of 36 to 4 against the assumption, and the
Bishops. 65
Solicitor-General of England declared he had no legal
right whatever to the title of lord. This bishop more-
over was appointed by the Crown. Now, however,
bishops are chosen by delegates to a Synod. How can
they create a lord ? The late bishop of Algonna was
appointed after the adjournment of the Synod by the
Board of Bishops, seven only in number, and he was
called My Lord ! His clergy then amounted to four
or five only.
In the " Life of Bishop Wilberforce," we have a spe-
cimen of the bargains that are sometimes made.
Before Lord Auckland was translated to the See of
Bath and Wells in 1854, the Prime Minister Lord
Aberdeen expressly stipulated that he should neither
persecute Mr. Bennett nor prosecute Archdeacon
Denison. There were solid reasons for agreeing to
these terms, as his former see of Sodor and Man was
worth only ;^2,ooo, while the income of the Bishop of
Bath and Wells was i^5,ooo, — that is to say nominally,
for there are sundry uncounted extras which often
largely increase the bishop's stipends. It is strange that
Dr. Wilberforce's family allowed his life to be published,
as among other things recorded in the Bishop's diary is
the following charming picture of his episcopal bre-
thren in Ireland. Knox, Bishop of Down, was "very
foolish, without learning, piety, judgment, conduct or
sense," and " was appointed by a job that his uncle
should resign Limerick." Griffin, bishop of Limerick,
was " quite unread, had no taste for the episcopate,"
Higgins, bishop of Derry, had " a most appropriate
mind, would take what another had just said and re-
peat it ostentatiously as his own, even to the sayer,"
Ossory;'' the most indolent man he ever knew," Cork,
" a mere Whatelyan, but of strong will and very over-
bearing" and tiie reviewers added that Soapy Sam^ or
Wily Wilberforce (for he was blessed with two nick-
5
66 Bishops.
names) had said of another bishop that he sold all his
livifigs, and yet, as many of our readers must remem-
ber, this f^ossip-monger was called the foremost
prelate in the English Church, and it was currently
reported that everybody from the humblest curate in
his diocese to the Prime Minister for the time being,
was afraid of the Bishop of Oxford.
If the Right Reverend William Wilberforce, Lord
Bishop of Oxford, used such language of his own
brethren, an humble layman must not be too severely
blamed for also taking off his gloves, in doing which
he is only following the example of a peer of the Realm
who when lately (1890), rebuking a newly fledged
bishop for his presumption held him up to ridicule as
" this young Goliath not a year old in his breeches,"
and this not anonymously, for the letter was signed
" Grimthorpe."
The recent death of that Christian man Bishop
Lightfoot, worthy successor of the godly Bishop
Baring who gave away all his official income, only
leaving his private fortune to his children, but who
because he did not favor the modern innovations
was nicknamed Overbearing, will remind some of
the way the bishops hurried up to London about
ten years ago to vote in favor of the Afghan expedi-
tion. The See of DurJiani was vacajit !
Dr. Ellicott, Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol,
made the highest bid of these men of peace (!), for
he boldly declared in the House of Lords that the
expedition was highly commendable, as being likely
to increase the spread of the Gospel in Asia ! Like
Mohamet the Right Rev. Dr. was ready to spread
the Gospel at the point of the sword. His remarks
were attributed at the time to the above fact, viz.
the vacancy of the See of Durham, which was worth
£7,000 a year while his own See was only ;^5,ooo.
Bishops. ' 67
Lord Beaconsfield probably thought they had all
had more than they deserved and disappointed them
by giving the vacant See to the late Bishop Light-
foot.
The refereiice to Bishop Baring reminds us that
the Episcopal Address of 1875, should not be allowed
to pass away in oblivion. It was signed by the two
archbishops and all the bishops of England, except
two only, one of whom, Bishop Baring, at once entered
his protest against it, saying amongst other things,
that his chief objection to the manifesto was that it
was so indefinite in its statements — so feeble in its
conclusions — and adding : " But this address of almost
all the members of the Episcopate of the Reformed
Church of England dared not venture to utter a
single word with reference to the two most serious
errors which are the cause of the ' embittered con-
troversy ' of which it speaks."
And it was too true. The Archbishops of Canter-
bury and York, and all the bishops of England, two
only excepted, did not dare to utter a word against
the ritualistic doctrine of the Real Presence and the
introduction of Auricular Confession by a large num-
ber of the clergy.
Our old friend the late Rev. H. Paddon, in his
" Fifty Years in the Church" (Dorking, 1880) blessed
God that there were some faithful bishops ; but added
" As far as my experience goes, I could count those
whom I conscientiously believe to have been put into
the office of bishop by God the Holy Ghost during my
fifty years' ministry upon my ten fingers." The reve-
rend gentleman was a bold man, beloved by his peo-
ple and not afraid to tell the truth — no trifling matter,
for as Andrew Marvel said two centuries ago :
" All Litanies in this have wanted faith,
There's no — Deliver us from a bishop's wrath,"
68 • Bishops.
And now, the Rev. William Acworth of Bath, an
octogenarian, writes in The English Churchman'' hX.
the utmost verge of life, and with my final summons
in view, I wish to express my very poignant regret
that a son of Edward IBickersteth, whom I have heard
preach in a dissenting chapel, should have inhibited
a clergyman from officiating in his diocese because he
had appeared at a dissenting service. . . . Alas,
mitres, pastoral staves, episcopal rings, and a timid
and subservient clergy have made bishops to be rather
' lords over God's heritage than examples to the
flock.' Some of the most tyrannical acts I have ever
known have been done by them in the prosecution of
good men, while I cannot recall a single instance in
which they have inhibited a clergyman for frequenting
the theatre, the racecourse, or a Popish service. .
. . The silencing of good men by our bishops for
attending dissenting services is to me somewhat of a
novelty. When I was a young man many of the Dons
of Cambridge — and among them the Master of Trinit}^
who was also a bishop — were not unfrequently seen at
the chapel of the celebrated Robert Hall, and Arch-
deacon Dealtry, who entered me at college, told me
that when he went to Brighton he often attended the
ministry of Mr. Sortain, a Congregationalist."
" But the more tyrannical have been our bishops, the
more subservient have become the clergy. At one
time I hoped and believed that some good men would
rise up in the spirit and power of Luther or John
Knox to make manifest that they were ' set for the
defence of the Gospel ' against Ritualism and Roman-
ism. But, alas ! the men whom I loved and revered
when I entered the ministry , . . left no repre-
sentatives. Instead of being respected, we have been
' filled with the scornful reproof of the proud.' "
Bishops prefer obsequiousness to energy, dignity or
Bishops. 69
independence, and to have the " priests " their own
creatures, so that they may have perfect control of the
church. A late R. C. Archbishop of Lyons summed
up the system in the blunt remark " we want pliant
backbones, not thinking heads," and such are always
to be found, for as General Billot, a late French Min-
ister of War, said of princes: "Where there are
planets there will be satellites, and princes (bishops)
excite flatteries as pear trees bring forth pears."
Too many of the clergy have, as Ingoldsby says,
" to crawl into favor with his diocesan," and on account
of which " abject slavery " he (himself a cleric) adds
" It is probably for this reason that the clergy
have been designated the neutral sex, and not alto-
gether without justification, when the serfdom of their
position is borne in mind."
How many would dare to answer as good John Ber-
ridge, Vicar of Everton, did when his diocesan ex-
claimed in a rage " Do you know who I am?" " Yes,"
was the reply, " poor sinful dust and ashes like myself."
We once asked an aged Christian friend who had just
declined a Rural Deanery, why bishops wore aprons.
** Because they have so much dirty work to do I sup-
pose," was his reply.
The English papers often ridicule the antiquated
garb, shovel hat, gaiters and cassock as being alto-
gether behind the' times, and it should never have been
introduced into the Colonies.
Lord Palmerston frequently consulted the Earl of
Shaftesbury before appointing bishops, but the earl
was so often deceived that he said in the House of
Lords in 1878, that "experience had taught him to
trust no one after he became a bishop."
In Rome where bishops " most do congregate," and
where Cardinal bishops, Cardinal archpriests. Cardi-
nal vicars, Cardinal priests. Cardinal deacons and
70 Bishops — Black Gown.
Archbishops also abound, the former are not such very-
important personages, and Napoleon the Third knew
this when soon after he came into power he addressed
Bishop Dupanloup as Monsieur I' Eveque — Mr. Bishop.
We have referred elsewhere to the Spanish Re-
formed Church which dates from 1880, and has eight
pastors. They chose the Rev. J. B. Cabrera as their
bishop but he has not been consecrated since the
Council at Lambeth which was appealed to, recognize
the Church of Rome as the CJiurch of Spain, and will
not clash with it by appointing a bishop under its
jurisdiction. (See Apostolical Succession, Presbyter
and Priest^
Black Gown. In 1562 the Convocation which
drew up our Thirty-nine Articles attended public
service in St. Paul's, and on the 13th of Janu-
ary the Archbishop of Canterbury came himself
to the Cathedral attended i^i state by the officers
and ministers of his court when the Rev. W. Day
preached the sermon and it is on record that
" he wore in the pulpit the gown of tJie Bachelor of
Divinity (habitu baccalaurei in theologia indutus), and
according to Queen Elizabeth's advertisement of 1564,
a side gown [i.e., a long gown), with sleeves straight
at the band is the authorized garment for the
preacher.
The 58th Canon of 1603 enjoins that Ministers
reading Divine Service and administering the Sacra-
ments are to wear Surplices.
By the 74th they " shall usually wear gowns as is
usual in the Universities." When therefore not wear-
ing the surplice as in the 58th, then on the authority of
the 74th they appear in gowns at Court, at Visitations
or in the Pulpit.
According therefore to the Canons the surplice is
Black Gown — Bowing in the Creed. yi
the vestment appointed to be worn during the celebra-
tion of Divine Service only. This service ceases when
the clergyman ascends the pulpit ; he then states his
own views and opinions relative to the Scripture
text selected by him. His utterances may or
may not be the utterances of the Church of
England as stated in the P. B. and Articles;
he is therefore not privileged to wear the sur-
plice and the black gown was universally worn until
the innovation of preaching in the surplice about
half a century ago. It was the time-honoured preach-
ing dress for 300 years but now how many Evangeli-
cals call it as usual a trifle or a thing indifferent
although they know very well that the Ritualists
consider it the very opposite to indifferent. (See
Surplice in the Pulpit^
Bowing in the Creed. The name Jesus is not in
one sense the proper name of our most blessed
Lord. If any language is sacred is it not the Hebrew,
and in that tongue His name is Joshua or Jeshua, a
contraction of Jehoshua, which signifies Saviour.
Jesus is the Greek form only and why should we pay
what some consider due reverence by bowing at this
Greek name only and ignoring the English name of
Saviour .? Is the Greek a more sacred language than
ours as this would seem to imply ? If so should we
not all learn it and say our prayers in that tongue ?
We profess to believe in a Holy Trinity in which
" none is greater or less than another," and yet we
solemnly say " I believe in God the Father Almighty "
{no movement) " and in Jesus Christ " A DEEP BOW OR
A LOW COURTESY), " who was conceived by the Holy
Ghost " (no movement) !
Is not this a senseless superstition to bow at our
Lord's name in Greek and ignore those of the First
Bozvtfisr in tJie Creed.
and Third Persons of the Holy Trinity as the names
of Emmanuel, Messiah, Redeemer, etc., are ignored
elsewhere ? And yet how many say it is immaterial,
it is not a matter of vital importance, but High
Churchmen do not think so or Laud and Sheldon
would not have persecuted the Puritans on that
account, for the English Inquisition showed them no
mercy.
Two authorities only are, we believe given in favor
of the practice, viz.. the N. T. and a Canon, both of
which we will proceed to explain.
The custom which was condemned by the Italian
Reformer Zanchi, who died in 1590, and which was
falling into disuse half a century ago and was not
observed at all in many churches, was revived by the
Puseyites.
It is Pagan in its origin. The Druids bowed to the
new moon, and in the fifth century Pope Leo the
Great condemned some Christians of the weaker sort
because they turned towards the rising sun and bowed
down their heads (see East at the recital of the Creed),
and to this day the Yezides of Asia Minor bow in
adoration before the rays of the rising sun.
Bowing appears however to have been established
in the Church of Rome by Pope Gregory X. (died
1276), but was dropped by us at the Reformation, but
afterwards reintroduced and was then soon founded
upon a false interpretation of the passage in Philip-
pkins ''at the name of Jesus," which in Wycliffe's Bible
(A.D. 1380, is ''in the name of ihesus," and Tyndale
(1534), Cranmer (1539), and even the Rheims or R. C.
Douay Bible of 1582, agree therewith, and in the
Vulgate it is the same, in nomine, signifying that we
should offer up onr prayers in the name of our Lord
Jesus, but Archbishop Bancroft, who hated the Puri-
tans, presided over the Convocation of 1603, who
Bowing i?i the Creed. 73
passed the Canon on Bowing and was also principal
Supervisor of our Authorized Version, and was charged
by the Puritans with having altered " at " to *' in ^' to
make the Bible agree with the Canon (!), and it is an
established fact that *' in " was changed to " at " in the
P. B. in the Epistle for the Sunday next before Easter,
prior to 1638, without authority but with the cogniz-
ance of Archbishop Laud, for on his trial he acknowl-
ledged the fact, but said he himself had not done it.
In the Greek Testament the word is " en," which is
so similar to our English " in," that it could hardly
have b6en rendered " at," except for some such reason
as that given by the Puritans.
Dr. Alford, Dean of Canterbury, in his Revised
N. T. published in 1869 also translated it " in," and in
the Revised Version, first published in 1 881, it is like-
wise correctly translated " in."
Other early translators found no trouble with this
passage, but they were not guided by a Bancroft. In
French we read '^ Afin qii au Noin de Jesus!' In Qi&x-
xxvdXi,'' Das in dem Namen Jesu!' In Y^xsXch/' Opdat
in den naani van Jezusl' and in Italian, " Accioche nel
nome de Gesu!'
It is true an Englishman, trusting alone to his
Dictionary, might translate " Au " by " at," but a
Frenchman would tell him that in this case it has but
one signification. We have now before us original
Documents of the first French Empire and of the
Bourbons. The first commences '' Au Nom de VEm-
pereur des Frangais " (In the name of the Emperor of
the French) ; the second '' Au Nom du Roi'' (In the
King's Name).
In the Geneva Bible (1557) alone, "en" is translated
" at," but this translation was made by the English
exiles at Geneva, where the French Bible was in
common use, and they were undoubtedly guided in
74 Bowing in tJie Creed.
some manner by that version, and probably therefore
not bein^ very perfect French scholars, translated the
French " au " — " at " — and when the Puritans com-
plained the Geneva was brought forth as authority.
One incorrect version being preferred — because it suited
tJicir purpose, above five correct ones then before
them.
The Puritan party maintained that all the names of
God and of Christ should be held in equal reverence
and it was therefore unreasonable to bow only at the
name of Jesus, and in 1604 addressed a petition to the
King called the Millenary petition, entitled " The
humble petition of Ministers of the Church of England
desiring a reformation of certain ceremonies and
abuses of the Church," one article of which was that
no minister be charged to teach the people to bow at the
name of Jesus.
The 1000 {juillc) subscribers were not completed,
probably on account of want of time, but it was signed
by eight hundred and twenty-five beneficed clergymen
in different counties, or about one-twelfth of the clergy
of England, which was really a very large number
when we take into consideration that there were then
no mails. "^
Laud himself, although he even fined the son of the
Lord Chief Justice of England, did^not succeed in
making bowing a general custom, for in the " State
Papers " is a letter from an Englishman named
Samuel Brett who was in Paris in 1655, during the
Commonwealth. Many Royalists were residing there
and were allowed to follow their own religion, and
Brett adds " and for their form of worship it is the
same as was formerly in England, with the Book of
Common Prayer and the rites therein used ; and also
*Post communication between London and most towns existed thirty
years later, but cross posts were only established in 1720.
Bowing in the Creed. 75
they continue the innovations that were practised by
many of our clergy, as bowing at the name of Jesus,
towards the altar, etc., — which I know giveth offence
to the good French Protestants, who, to me, did often
condemn these innovations for Roman superstitions."
After the Restoration Archbishop Sheldon contrived
to get the Canon on Bowing made a Law of the
Realm, in 1664, and the penalty was fines and im-
prisonment for the first and second offence and for the
third time a fine of ;^ioo and transportation to the
Colonies !
It is a pity that the practice which was becoming
obsolete should have been revived again. In 1853
Dean Close spoke of " neiv-f angled bowings^ turnings,
curtseyings, and surpliced processions," and the Leek
(Eng.) Times, recently (1889) published a list showing
how Ritualism had gradually progressed in their
Parish Church during the past forty years. It com-
menced :~(i) "Holy Table called ' Altar.'" (2) Sur-
plice in the Pulpit. (3) '^Bowing at the name of
Jesus^' and a little lower down " Children in day and
Sunday schools taught to bow a?id to cross themselves^
A lady born in Dublin told the writer she had never
bowed in the Creed in Ireland but when she came to
Toronto nearly half a century ago she was informed
there was a Canon in the Canadian Church making
the practice obligatory and therefore considered it her
duty to do so. She was surprised to learn that she
had been misinformed.
Should however the " mechanical jerkers of the
head," in the language of that High Churchman the
Right Rev. Dr. Maclagan, Lord Bishop of Lichfield,
who fears it is becoming too much of a formality, —
should the " jerkers " fall back on the Canon we must
be permitted to add that at Laud's trial in 1645 it was
shown that these Canons were not binding, not being
jC) Bowing in the Creed.
confirmed by Parliament, and especially since the
Homilies, the Book of Common Prayer, the Articles
of Religion and the Book of Ordination, which are the
only authentic rules of the church make no mention
of it.
Should any be still unconvinced let us refer to what
happened here in Toronto not many years since.
In 1874, when the Church Association was in exist-
ence, of which the late Chief Justice Draper was
President and the late Dean Grasett and the present
Hon. S. H. Blake, Q.C and Sir Daniel Wilson, LL.D.,
were Vice-Presidents, the Dean and ten other clergy-
men were presented by some of their clerical brethren
before a Bishop's Court, under Canon No. 73 *' Minis-
ters not to hold Private Conventicles," it being con-
tended that the Church Association was such a Con-
venticle ! The penalty was EXCOMMUNICATION !
Messrs. Blake, Kerr and Boyd were the counsel for
the C. A., and it was said in defence " The wonderful
inappropriateness of many of these Canons to the
Government of the Church in this or any other country
at the present time cannot be better shown than by an
extract of the next following Canon, being No. 74 of
the same body of Canons."
"We do further in like manner ordain that all eccle-
siastical persons shall usually wear," etc., etc. (we omit
the greater part), " and no ecclesiastical person shall
wear any coif or wrought night cap, but only plain
night caps, of black silk, satin or velvet," etc., etc.,
" and that they wear not any light colored stockings^
As might have been expected the trial ended in
smoke, much undoubtedly to the chagrin of those
clergymen who had hoped to step into the shoes of
their " excommunicated " brethren, and especially
those of the Dean whose living was a very valuable one.
Not only then are the By-laws of the Convocation
Bowing in tJie Creed. yy
of 1603, not binding, but they are also " wonderfully
inappropriate" according to the opinion of eminent
Canadian lawyers.
In case any, however, refuse to acknowledge this,
the question then is — as No. 18 on Bowing and No.
73 on Decency of Apparel are both equally binding,
is it not as great a sin for a Minister to wear clean
white socks as it is not to bow in the Creed } In
both cases he is breaking the Canons, and who can
tell how many of the clergy are guilty of wearing un-
canonical night caps ?
To resume. — Archbishop Bancroft is thus described
by Mountfield " This fiery and ambitious prelate.
. whose little mind was intoxicated by schemes
of ecclesiastical aggrandisement." Anger seems to
have been his normal state, for old Fuller says " he
spoke most politely when not in passion," and
Bishop Short, speaking of the Hampton Court Con-
ference says " During the discussion 13ancroft suffered
himself to be carried away by the violence of his tem-
per . . . but the king reproved him."
In all probability it is to this " little-minded," " am-
bitious " prelate to whom we are indebted for the
Canon on Bowing. Those therefore who bow in the
Creed acknowledge a false translation of the Bible
and a Prayer Book altered without the authority of
Parliament, and the law those who do not bow are
breaking is a Civil law which could never be enforced
in these days, viz., that the principal penalty of which
was transportation to the Colonies !
And why do Ministers who are sticklers for obeying
the Canon on Bowing, which is based upon a false-
hood, at the same time leave the Holy Tables un-
covered, contrary to Canon No. 82 of the same code }
Is it because they prefer to have the Tables look like
altars }
y^ Boiving to the so-called ''Altars
Bishop Bickersteth's new Hymnal has lately ap-
peared. Hymn No. 563 bears for heading " God hath
given him a name . . . that at the name," etc.,
and commences : —
" At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow."
Does the bishop thereby mean to ignore the Vul-
gate, Wycliffe, Tyndale,Cranmer, Dean Alford,and the
Revised Version, as well as the Dutch, the German
and the Italian versions, and on the other hand to up-
hold the tools of Archbishops Bancroft and Laud ?
Bowing to the so-called "Altar." This is done
because the so-called *' Priest " professes to believe that
the body of our Lord is, or has been there.
Rushworth's account of Laud's consecration of the
Church of St. Catherine shows how far this can be
carried. " As he (Archbishop Laud) approached the
Communion Table he made several lowly boivings ;
and coming to the side of the table where the bread
and wine were covered, he bozued seven times ; and
then after the reading of many prayers he came near
the bread and gently lifted up the corner of tbe napkin
wherein the bread was laid, and when he beheld the
bread he laid it down again, flew back a step or two,
boived tJiree several times towards it ; then he drew
near again and opened the napkin and bowed as before.
Then he laid his hand upon the cup which was full of
wine with a cover upon it, which he let go again, went
back and boived thrice toward it ; and then he came
near again, and lifting up the cover of the cup looked
into it, and seeing the wine he let fall the cover again,
went back and boived as before.
Whoever has seen the cardinals and prelates in
Rome bowing to each other at High Mass on fete
Bowing to the so-called ''Altar'' 79
days will not be surprised at the above and it is car-
ried to a greater extent in the Greek Church.
Dr. H. Grattan Guinness says of the Greco-Russian
Church " They stand silent in the church, bowing and
crossing themselves like dumb actors in a mediaeval
pantomine, crossing themselves and betiding and bow-
ing over and over all the time. Their whole worship
seems to consist of these movements. Such an
amount of crossing themselves by an intelligent people
I never saw before . . . and as to the bowing!
The people's heads in the church are just bowing all
the time, with every now and then a profounder stoop,
till the floor is touched with the forehead."
In the Roman Catholic Church the priests not only
bow to the altar but to each other. The Rev.
William Arthur in his Italy in Transition, describes
what he saw at St. Peter's in Rome, at the same time
apologising for using the term Master of Ceremonies,
but says that is what he is called by the R. C. Bishop
Baggs in his book on Holy Week.
" Now and then the Canons came to the lectern,
with great pomp of approach and return. As it came
to the turn of each, the Master of the Ceremonies ap-
proached the side on which the next reader sat, and
made a profound bozv. The Canon left his seat,
walked to the lectern, followed by the waiting man,
who lent him a hand to help him to bow his knee ; and
altogether waited upon him as if he were a lady, or an
invalid. The short Psalm was intoned, and sometimes
one could catch a word, — but very rarely. The great
man and little man bozved to one another ; then the
great man walked to his seat, and the little man fol-
lowed to the edge of the Canon's benches, where he
waited till the great man had reached his place, when he
bowed and was bowed to again. If I had counted the
8o Brotherhoods.
bozus, and the times this was repeated my readers
would hardly believe me."
One of the popes, we are told, forgot to bow to a
painting of the Virgin and was snubbed in conse-
quence.
In the church of S.S. Cosmas and Damian, Rome,
is a so-called " miraculous " picture of the Madonna,
which is declared by an inscription to have spoken to
Pope Gregory the Great and reproved him when he
once passed it without doing reverence. It is not
however absolutely necessary to believe this inscrip-
tion, neither need we believe that the painting is as
old as the time of Gregory the Great, as the legend
was probably invented some seven centuries later, at
or about the time that bowing was introduced into the
Roman Church, and the whole probably concocted to
serve as authority for the practice.
Brotherhoods. Did not the Almighty Himself say
" It is not good that man should be alone ; I will
make him a help meet for him V' And did not the
Lord Jesus honor wedlock with His presence and as-
sistance in Cana of Galilee, and yet Rome dares to
affirm the contrary and to say that the state of the
celibate is the nearest to perfection ! What does St.
Paul say in his epistle to Timothy (Revised Version).?
" The bishop (or overseer) must be . . . the hus-
band of one wife." " Let deacons be the husband of
one wife," and among " doctrines of devils " St. Paul
includes " forbidding to marry." " I desire therefore
that the younger widows (or women) marry, bear
children, rule the household." and his language to the
Corinthians is stronger still.
Can anything be more clear ? In the Contemporary
for January, 1890, the Bishop of Ripon (Dr. Boyd
Carpenter) says :
*Tf it needs to be constantly remembered that there
BrotJierhoods. S I
is nothing which is necessarily Roman in the idea of
Brotherhoods, it is no less necessary to observe the
cautions and warnings which the history of such in-
stitutions reveals. We are neither to be deterred from
making an experiment by the cry that it is Roman,
nor are we to be blinded to the risks which we en-
counter by the eagerness of those ^vho only welcome
the proposal for the very reason which in others
awakens alarm. There are dangers ; and the evi-
dence which is the most striking is that which comes
from the Latin Church itself. It would be simple
madness to ignore the lessons of the past. In the
twelfth century, Arnulf, Bishop of Lisieux, requested
Pope Alexander VIII. to dissolve the monastery of
Grestain, on the ground that it was past reformation.
At the close of the fourteenth century Nicolas de Cle-
manges charged the monasteries with being scenes of
waste, idleness, and drunkenness. The Councils of
Constance and Basel approved the statements of
Bridget of Sweden, when she depicted the dark and
low condition of the religious houses. In the six-
teenth century a Committee of Cardinals (Reginald
Pole was one of the number) expressed their opinion
that the religious houses ought to be abolished. In
the eighteenth century Scipio de Ricci, Bishop of
Pistoia, excommunicated the Dominican friars, and
forbade their officiating in his diocese. But perhaps
the most remarkable illustration of all is one derived
from our own days : —
" The total number of monasteries, etc., suppressed
in Italy down to the close of 1882 was 2255, involving
an enormous displacement of property and dispersion
of inmates. And yet there is some reason to think
that the State did but do roughly and harshly what
the Church should have done more gradually and
wisely ; for the judgment passed on the dissolution by
(^2 BrotJirrJioods.
Pius IX. himself, in speaking to an English Roman
Catholic bishop, was : " It was the devil's work, but
the good God will turn it into a blessing, since their
destruction was the only reform possible to them.' "*
On general grounds, too :
*' The rule observed by one may be disastrous to
the thousands, who, under the influence of some pass-
ing excitement or eager emotion, take upon them-
selves a burden which experience may show was too
grevious for them to bear. Lifelong vows appear to
me to be of this nature, when the vow involves that
which is not necessary for righteousness' sake. The
Convocation of Canterbury has realized this danger,
and has pronounced against a system of life-long
vows. There is wisdom in this decision. To make a
life-long vow, in a matter which is neither within the
survey of experience nor in the statute-book of uni-
versal righteousness, is (if I may use an old-fashioned
phrase belonging to an age of greater faith and less
fussiness than the present) to tempt Providence. We
may be asked if there is not such a thing as a call to
celibacy. I have no doubt of it. Our Lord's words
are sufficient for me on the matter ; but he who is
so called needs no vow : the call will be evidenced
in the fact of his life. And it is to be remembered
that a man may be called to be a father of saints who
does not know of his calling till he is far advanced
in life. To make a vow which anticipates or prevents
the calling of Providence savours of little faith, not of
large faith, and has in it a flavour of self-will rather
than that spirit which waits on the will of Him who,
though He orders the whole life, yet veils from us His
leadings from period to period."
The Bishop of Winchester (Harold Browne) said
*See Articles on Monasteries in "Encyclopedia Britannica."
Brotherhoods. 83
" It seems to me that it must be a blessing to a
clergyman and to a clergyman's parish that he should
live a married life " And as regards dea-
conesses " I venture to think there is no deaconess in
a country parish as good as a clergyman's wife, and
no head deaconness as good as a bishop's wife."
Bishop Ryle says " I am content with the vows of
baptism and confirmation, and I want no more.
. . If men professing to be converted, and true
believers in a crucified Christ, cannot be chaste, self-
denying and obedient without solemnly registering a
vow, I must plainly say I think they are not likely to
do much good. At present I see scores of curates
and Scripture readers doing excellent work as men
simply licensed, with no vows at all. If the members
of the proposed brotherhoods cannot do like work
without vows I think it will be a public confession that
they are an interior order of men."
The late Bishop Lightfoot did not fail to call the
Brotherhood scheme by its proper name — " monasti-
cism," and when lately a Brotherhood was established
in the diocese of Marlborough TJie Christian said
" The principal interest in this movement is its retro-
gade character. As a Christian institution it is not
only a superfluity, but a mischievous accretion, Pagan
in its origin and Romish in form and prestige. . .
With more of Christ we should have no lack of work-
ers for the common good and followers of the Apostle
Paul in earnestness and devotion would leave no room
for such an organization with the weaknesses and
temptations of monasticism as The Lay Brotherhood
of St. Paul."
The Rev. Hobart Seymour describes monasticism as
'* A vast body of bachelors without honest wives or
children," and General Sir Robert Phayre m an Ad-
dress before the Protestant Alliance lately, quoted the
84 Bui^ial of the Dead— Calendar.
Rev. I'icrce Connelly, in his Letter to the Earl of
Shreii'sbury, as saying that " Rome has never dared to
exact the vow or even the promise of chastity from
any candidate for holy orders, either before, or at, or
after ordination to the priesthood." (Sec Celibacy and
Sisterhoods.)
Burial of the Dead. Our ministers are compelled
to commit to the grave men killed in a duel
or prize fight, avowed infidels and heretics and
the like " in sure and certain hope of the Resurrection
to eternal life " — and to thank GoD that it hath pleased
Him to take unto Himself the soul of our dear
brother.
The Americans changed this and read " Forasmuch
as it hath pleased Almighty GOD, in His wise provi-
dence, to take out of this world the soul of our de-
ceased brother ; " and instead of " sure and certain
hope " they say " looking for the general resurrection
in the last day and the life of the world to come " and
"we give thee hearty thanks for the good examples of
all those thy servants, who having finished their course
in faith do now rest from their labours ' — and they
omitted the words " as our hope this our brother doth."
Calendar. The most ancient Chri.stian Calendar,
which is said to have been compiled in Rome under
Pope Julius, A.D. 336, contained both Pagan and
Christian festivals, and Pope Gregory the Great
(A.D. 590), who sent St. Augustine to convert the
Anglo-Saxons, gave permission in his orders to offer
the same sacrifice to the saints on their respective holi-
days they had been accustomed to offer to their gods.
In the course of time these holidays gradually in-
creased until they became innumerable, there not
being a. day which was not attributed to many so-
called " Saints or Martyrs."
Calendar. 8 5
In King Edward's books they were all left out with
the exception of twenty-five Scriptural commemora-
tions, together with St. George, St. Lawrence and St.
Clement, but sixty more Romish Saints were after-
wards introduced, principally as it was given out, for
public convenience, as they marked the days of hold-
ing the Courts of Justice (as Hilary Term, etc.), fairs
and markets, and the days when the city companies
celebrated their anniversaries on the days of their
tutelar or patron saints, but the people do not know
this and (scholars excepted) consider all equally holy,
especially now that the Red Letter Days are only to
be found in the most expensive Prayer Books.
Among those afterwards restored were St. Denys of
France (which was then still claimed by England), St.
David for the Welsh, St. Dunstan for the goldsmiths,
St. Leonard for the locksmiths and St. Crispin for the
cobblers ; St. Martin having charge of the master-
shoemakers.
The sun or the sun-god was anciently worshipped
under myriads of names, all the world over, and to
this day he is adored by the Parsees and others in the
East Indies and in America by the Indians in their
sun-dances. His great name Tammuz occurs so
seldom in texts that it has been considered too holy
for use, such being a customary habit with the Pagans,
Valentia, for instance, although for another cause,
having been the secret and hallowed name of Rome.
His Assyrian title was Dionysus, i.e., Judge of Men,
and he appears in our Calendar as " St. Denys, B. &
M.," but that this so-called " Saint, Bishop and Mar-
tyr " was neither the one nor the other but the Pagan
god is evident, for Bacchus, who was the same as
Dionysus, was said to have been born in Eleutherae
and the Greeks worshipped him as Dionysus Eleuthe-
rius. The Romans seem to have forgotten this, and
S6 Calendar — Candles on the so-called "' AltarP
considered them to be separate gods and added them to
their Calendar connected by an " and " (Missale
Romanmn) Oct. 9 " Dionysii et Eleutherii, Mart."
We have only retained the former and is not the
sun-god therefore included in our collect for All
Saint's Day ?
To conclude. The Calender is the Key to the P. B.
and yet in that Key we acknowledge the Blessed
Virgin as OUR Ladv (Annunciation of Our Lady in
Lessons Proper), recognise a mass of fictitious Saints,
call a day Ash- Wednesday as if we are still hoping for
a return of the ceremony of sackcloth and ashes, make
the day of Astarte our great day, " on wJiich the rest
depend,^'' and although no one knows the true date,
neither of the Nativity or the Resurrection, make the
former agree with the date in the almanac while the
latter is the subject of an abstruse calculation. (See
Alban, All Saints and Invocation of Saints.
Candles on the so-called ** Altar." These are de-
rived from the Pagan fire-worship of Tammuz, the
sun-god, mentioned in Ezekiel, who was worshipped
under his various names with candles, torches and
fire throughout the world and the custom has been
maintained in many places down to our own times.
It cannot be derived from the fire on the altar of
burnt-offering which was the fire that came down from
heaven and consumed upon the altar the burnt-offering
and the fat, for that was neither torch nor candle, but a
fire that did not smoke and was one of the things in the
first temple which the Jews declared did not exist in
the second
Baruch who was living B.C. 586, and is by some be-
lieved to have died in Babylon after the destruction of
Jerusalem, tells us that the Babylonians lighted up
candles to their gods " They light them candles more
Candles on the so-called " Altar" '^J
than for themselves whereof they cannot see one," and
Christians copied the custom at an early date, for
about the year 305, the Council of Illiberis, in Spain,
found it necessary to prohibit the use of candles at the
tombs of the martyrs who had already usurped the
place of the heathen demi-gods. Lactantius, known
in his time (AD. 310) as the Christian Cicero, said
" They light up candles to God as if He dwelt in the
dark, and do they not deserve to pass for madmen who
offer up lamps to the author and giver of light ? "
The Romans had a feast on the 2nd of February in
honour of Ceres or Juno Februata and walked in pro-
cession carrying lighted candles or torches. About
the fifth century as the Pope found the people would
not do away with this festival he devoted the day to
the Feast of the Purification, although no one knows
the date of that ceremony, and the people were told to
carry their lights in honour of the Virgin Mary. This
Candle-Mass (Candlemas) under the name of the Puri-
fication is still in our Calendar.
The Spaniards were astonished to find a sacred fire
and Vestal virgins in Peru four centuries ago and
when there lately Squier was equally surprised to find
fires blazing on the mountains on what is called by
Romanists St. John's eve. This is the night of the
summer solstice or midsummer eve, which was sacred
in Pagan times to Tammuz under the name Cannes,
which was changed by the early Roman Church to
Johannes, and Oannes's or St. John's fires are still
made in Ireland and Brittany, as in Peru.
When Christianity was introduced into England
the Christians compromising as usual turned the tem-
ples into Churches by destroying the idols, sprink-
ling with holy water, which was only the Pagan lus-
tral water under another name, and placing relics in
them, but they retained the perpetual fire in many
88 Caudles oil i/ic so-called " Altar''
places in stones called cresset stones and in lamp
niches in churches. According to The CornlLill Maga-
zine a {(iw of these cresset stones are still remaining
in England, one of them being in York. There is one
also in Stockholm, and another outside of the Church
of St. Ambrose in Milan. This last is of white mar-
ble 3 feet 10 inches high and is 2 feet six inches in
diameter, at the top and on the flat surface are nine
cup-shaped hollows which were originally filled with
oil, and wicks held up by a small iron rod, were placed
in them and ignited.
Where Kildare now stands was formerly a sacred
grove of the Druids. About the end of the fifth cen-
tury a Druidess was converted by St. Patrick and
founded a monastery, but maintained the sacred fire
in a cell where it was guarded by virgins (like the
Roman Vestal virgins), often women of quality, called
In'ghcan an Dagha, daughters of fire, and Breo-
chuidh, or the fire-keepers, and it was not extin-
guished until A.D. I220 by an Archbishop of Dub-
lin, but so firmly rooted was the veneration for this
sacred fire that it was relighted in a few years and
actually kept burning until the suppression of mon-
asteries in 1539.
In England the Christians continued to extinguish
their fires at Easter and light them again with fire
obtained from the priests long after the Pagan and
Christian festivals were amalgamated,* and so late as
1557 there was a paschal taper in Westminster Abbey
which weighed 300 pounds.
Plres to Beltis or the Lady, wife of Baal, (Lord),
called Beltane, (Bel tein, BePs fire) have been made in
* Before the invenlion of lucifer matches half a century ago, so diffi-
cult was it to li^'ht a 'iw^t with flint and steel that people never put out
their fires at niiiht but covered the embers with ashes and raked them
out in the morning.
Candles on the so-called "'Altar!' — Canon 89
Scotland in our own times. In the State of New
York, in the year 1753, an Iroquois Chief said " When
the fire at Onondaga goes out we shall no longer be a
people." At Pecos, in New Mexico, the eternal fire
was kept burning until about the \'ear 1846, and to this
very day the N. A. Indians celebrate their sun-dances
during which they pass " sacred " articles through
the fire, torture themselves, as the Bible says the fol-
lowers of Baal did, and even cut out little snips of
flesh and raise them on the point of their knives
toward the sun ! The Guebres or Persian sun-wor-
shippers have a temple at Yezd in Persia where the
everlasting fire has been burning since the time of
Zoroaster. The Chinese still have an annual feast of
lanterns. The Buddhists burn thousands of small
candles on their shrines and lastly —
What shall we say of many English Churches ?
See Easter and Lights).
Canon. The word canon is so imposing that many
without reflection consider canons as almost divine
laws instead of which they are merely by-laws made
by fallible men.
About a quarter of a century ago the Queen and
Prince Albert were condemned by many for allowing
the Royal Marriages to be performed during Lent,
contrary to the canons, but the only canons were those
of the Council or Synod of Laodicea, a council of
thirty-two bishops (and some of the prelates of those
days were Bishops of villages, many of whom could
not even write) so obscure that it is uncertain whether
it was held as early as A.D. 314 or as late as 399.
Besides which it was not even a General Council, but
a provincial or diocesan one, neither have the original
canons been preserved but only a summary or ab-
stract, and not in the shape they were passed. One
QO Canon — Cat ho tic.
other Council was formerly added to confirm the
above, viz., that of Lerida in 546, but their supposed
canon is now allowed to be spurious, but even were it
not so what rii^ht had this little Spanish Council of
nine members only, or any other Council to dictate to
the whole Christian world ?
St. Augustine, who died in 430, acknowledged this.
He says " I ought not to adduce the Council of Nice,
nor ought you to adduce the Council of /\riminum,
for I am not bound by the authority of one, nor are
you bound by the authority of the other. Let the
question be determined by the authority of the Scrip-
tures, which are witnesses peculiar to neither of us
but peculiar to both."
Canons are not binding on the laity in England by
their o\ /n force, but only when and so far as they are
declaratory of the common law, because the laity
have had no voice in making such by-laws.
Catholic. This Greek term belongs properly to
the Greel< Church alone, for although it was originally
applied to the whole Christian Church as synonymous
with orthodox the Greeks first adopted it as a distinc-
tive name, and it was afterwards borrowed from them
or rather usurped by the Roman Church when the
Pope claimed to be the head of the whole Church, and
it seems strange that when doing so the Romans did
not translate it into their own language but retained
the Greek word which signifies general or universal.
The N. T., the Canons of the first four General
Councils and the Nicene Creed were all first written
in Greek, and in a form of the latter of the year 451,
we find the words " the Holy Catholic {katho/ikcn)
Church.
The earliest form of the Roman or so-called Apostles'
Creed of A.D. 390, however, does not contain that
Catholic — Celibacy. g i
word but reads " SancUnn Ecclesiain " (Holy Church).
In a Greek version of King Athclstan's Psalter, about
the year 703, the words are " agian ckklcsian " (holy
church). In an Anglo-Saxon version in the Homilies
of yElfric it is " tha halgan gelatJmnge " (the holy con-
gregation). The first known version of this creed in
English, being of the 13th century is '' hely kirke^' and
even in a MS. of the 14th centur}^ in the Bodleian
library it is simply " holy church," but in the Prymer
in English and Latin, 8vo. Paris, 1538, it appears as
" The holy church catholike."
When the Americans revised their P. B. a century
ago, they changed the Greek word (probably either to
distinguish themselves from the R. C. Church, or that
there should be no ambiguity) to one universally
understood, and in the Prayer for all Conditions of
Men it reads " Thy holy church universal."
By styling themselves Catholic some members of
our Church wash to signify that they are not Protes-
tants. The latter however should by no means con-
cede to Romanists this title, for it is equivalent to
acknowledging themselves as heretics.
Celibacy. Clerical celibacy is neither of Divine
nor apostolical appointment. Did not St. Paul him-
self say " Have w^e not power to lead about a sister, a
wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of
the Lord, and Cephas t " And again " Let every man
have his own wife and every woman have her own
husband."
Roman priests are not allowed to marry and the
Roman Church does not allow the people to read the
Bible as otherwise in this and many other cases they
would soon learn that the Laws of GOD and the Laws
of the R. C. Church do not agree. Greek priests are
permitted to marry, but they interpret the Apostle's
92 Celibacy — Chancci
words " husband of one wife " to signify that widow-
ers must not marry ai^ain. (See Brotherhoods and
Sisterhoods)."
Chancel. When we took over the Romish Churches
the martyred Bishop Hooper and many others wished
to have all the chancels bricked up as they involved
the unscriptural idea that the clergy are a priestly
caste separated by some charm from the people of God.
Unfortunately this was not done. The choirs were
however brought out of the chancels (except from the
cathedrals where they unhappily retained an ornate
service for tlie reasons given elsewhere) — but now we
are putting them back again !
Chancels like the dais in a palace, raise barriers un-
duly between the congregation and pastor, and
although at the Reformation they unfortunately allowed
them to remain, the Rubric in the Communion Service
" The Table . . . shall stand in the Body of the
Church, or in the Chancel " proves clearly that they
were then only considered to hold a secondary
position.
l^ishop Durandus in his Book of Rites, printed in
Rome in 1591, said that the " chancel symbolized the
priests, the church triumphant, while the pavement of
the nave signified the people made to be trodden
under foot," and not many years ago one of Dr.
Pusey's curates, a Mr. Morris, had the effrontery to use
similar language : —
" Tlic ox was present at the Master's crib,
To sliow tliat priests should at His Altar live ;
The ass was also there
Fit emblem of the patient laity
Who meekly bear the burthens on them laid."
And accordingly Sacerdotalists call it the '* Sanc-
tuary," the Holy of Holies " only to be trodden upon
CJianccl. 93
by the priests and their assistants, and not to be pol-
luted by the feet of the laity y' whom they have always
looked upon with contempt. In 585 the Second
Council of Macon enacted that if a layman on horse-
back met a mounted clerk (or man in holy orders)
he should uncover his head ; if the clerk was on foot,
the layman shoidd dismount and salute him under pain
of being suspended from communion during the
bishop's pleasure.
There never was but one Holy of Holies and when
the Jews fell into idolatry the Shekinah or Glory-
cloud was withdrawn forever.
In the Prayer Book for the Young, we are told that
the chancel *' represents Heaven " — and to bear out
this idea more money is spent there than in any other
part of the building. Gold and colours abound and
windows zvith figures staring us in the face, although
our Reformers prohibited paintings on walls and win-
dows.
Canon Stowell said " Let it never be forgotten that
just as the church lost Jier spirituality she increased her
gorgeousjiess,'' and another writer says " Hence we do
not believe in such trumpery devices as priestly vest-
ments, elaborate altar-cloths, surpliced choirs and gew-
gaw chancels ; they only exist where the true "beauty
of holiness " is wanting.
Are St.. Paul's words entirely forgotten "God .
dwelleth not in temples made with hands
neither is zv or shipped by men's hands .^" Does the Al-
mighty see with eyes of flesh as miserable man does,
and admire our tawdry decorations ?
Some contend that because the Holy Communion
is administered (not celebrated) in the chancel it there-
by becomes more holy than the rest of the building,
but by the same rule those who have family prayers
in their dining room might claim that therefore that
94
CJianccl.
room was more sacred than the others, or that a bed-
room wlierc the Lord's Supper ha-J been administered
to a sick person was more holy than the other bed-
rooms.
Many old London churches have no chancels or
where there is a small one it does not differ in orna-
mentation from the rest of the church. The well-
known Church of St. Mary's, Islington, rebuilt in
175 1, consists of a nave only with galleries. At the
end is the Table, a slab of oak black with age, sup-
ported on legs at the four corners, and surrounded in
front and on both sides by a low rail. It cannot be
seen from the main entrance as the pulpit is in the
centre of the main aisle with the desk in front of and
below it, for the " preaching of the Gospel " was re-
cognized by our reformers as the chief end of public
worship. The pulpit was the centre object, and it was
so arranged that the greatest possible number should
be brought within the sound of the preacher's voice —
hence the erection of galleries.*
In this they differed from the Roman churches,
they being built with reference to a service which ad-
dressed the eye far more than the ear. A service that
dealt in gorgeous processions with banners and with
pompous ceremonies and all the finery of a ritual that
held men in awe by its outward fascinations, much of
which would have been hidden and lost in a church
with galleries — but now in building new churches or
restoring old ones we are doing away with the gal-
*Galleries however were originally built over the side aisles for the ac-
commodation of women, who neither in the Eastern or Western
Churches ever mixed with the men for many centuries. The oldest
known arc in the Church of St. Agncse fuori le Mure, Rome, erected
l)y Constant inc (ob. 337) and re-erccted in 625. This Church is one of
the few which have preserved their ancient form and arrangement without
change.
Chancet. 95
1 erics — we need not ask why, but what is to come
next?
The Decalogue in St. Mary's Church is in its proper
place on the wall behind the Table, and the Font is
also in its proper place near and in front of the pulpit.
The Rev. Sholto D. C. Douglas said that chancels
were the root of all evil and declared it as his opinion
that there should not be any, and when he became
Rector of All Soul's Church, Langham Place, London,
about ten years ago he re-introduced the black-gown,
changed the weekly communion to evening com-
munion, and applied for a faculty to remove the cross
from behind the table — which was granted. All
Souls' is a nave only without transepts and the place
where the Holy Table stands is so small and low that
it can hardly be called a chancel.
Fifty years ago nothing more in fact was needed
than a recess for the Communion Table with a space
of perhaps a dozen feet for the communicants in front.
TJie Ecclesiologist, accredited organ of the notorious
Cambridge Camden Society (Vol. iii. 1843-4) began
very mildly with regard to the chancel which it said
ought to be " raised a single step of six inches at the
chancel arch ; and considerably eastward of this must
be two other steps at least " — but ere long Pugin and
the other Romanizing architects made a rule that
whatever the size of the church, the depth of the chancel
shall be one-tJiird of the length of the nave^ and this was
for the Clergy alone ! Thus in a small church of say
seventy-five feet, twenty-five must be given to the
clergy, even if merely a single incumbent with perhaps
a choir of half a dozen boys, and only twice as much
for the whole of the congregation.
Can any one doubt that this was solely intended
for the Elevation of the Priesthood, shamefully also
increasing the cost of the building as well as the
of) CJianccl.
amount of the architect's commission. Moreover in a
lari^^e church how can a Minister's voice be heard when
standing at the Table at the end of this long building ?
When such chancels exist the people should insist
upon having the Holy Table brought forward, as near
to them as possible, and that the space should not be
wasted free seats might be placed behind it as is the
case in Liverpool.
Gladstone in his Tractarianism is Popery (London,
185 I ) used these words of the chancel " There you have
the separation of the priest (so-called) from the people,"
and the late Trincipal Shairp said "With my whole
heart I believe with Dr. Arnold that the separation of
the clergy from the people, as a separate caste
endowed with some mysterious and mystic function,
was the first and most fatal apostacy — a thing which,
more than any other, has paralyzed the power of
Christianity in the world."
According to the English CJmrcJunan the late Arch-
bishop Sumner was conversing with the Rev. W.
Ackworth of Bath, concerning the restoration of a
church, when the Rev. gentleman, who himself re-
lated the story, exclaimed " But, my Lord; there is no
chancel in the church," to which the Archbishop re-
})lied with great energy "And I should like to know
Sir what business a chancel has in any Protestant
Church," — and in reply to a request from the people
of Tasmania concerning a book Steps to the Altar
circulated with the approval of their High Church
bishop, His Grace wrote " I am of opinion that there
is no altar in the present dispensation ; and therefore
no steps can be required to it."
Five or six years ago the Church of the Holy Faith,
Sixteenth Street, New York, came into the charge of
a new Rector, the Rev. John W. Kramer, when the
so-called " altar " was removed, the elevated chancel
Chancel. 97
cut down to a level with the floor and everything
was restored to primitive simplicity.
A Protestant change took place about the same
time in London also, when the Vicar of St. Michael's,
North Kensington, the Rev. Dr. Gray, with the license
of the bishop of London, removed the organ and choir
from the chancel back to the gallery.
In 1877, Mr. and Mrs. Lewes (George Eliot) were
the guests of Dr. Jowett, Head Master of Baliol, Ox-~
ford. On the Sunday these famous heretics (!) went
to hear their host preach. Jowett had gone on before
and was just ascending the pulpit when he saw them
entering and looking vainly for seats, the church being
crowded as was usual when he preached. Jowett
beckoned them to advance which they did very,
timidly being not much used to churches, and he
absolutely placed them on each side of the Communion
Table in the large high-backed chairs usually reserved
for bishops where they sat fronting the amazed con-
gregation.
The Dr. might easily have found precedents for
placing laymen in the chancel had he desired. Addi-
son, in The Spectator, says " As soon as the sermon is
ended the knight walks down from his seat in the
cJianceL'' And speaking of the kindly feeling between
Sir Roger, the minister and people, he contrasts it
with the next village where there is a perpetual state
of war. "The parson is always preaching at the
squire ; and the squire to be revenged on the parson,
never comes to church. The squire has made all his
tenants atheists and tythestealers ; while the parson
instructs them every Sunday in the dignity of his
order, and insinuates to them in almost every sermon
that he is a better man than his patron." This was
in 171 1.
It should not be forgotten that thg Holy Temple
7
98 CJiantiug A incus — Choral Services.
passed away with the old Dispensation — and our
Cinu'clies take the place of the Synagogues, not of the
Temple, and our service is essentially a synagogue
service. (See ChurcJies and Communion Table.
Chanting" Amens. St. Paul says " How shall he
that occupicth the place of the unlearned say the
Amen at the giving of thanks T' Why, as sometimes
happens in our Evangelical Churches where the
Minister says Amen in our own language, should the
choir master be allowed to lead off the congregation
w^ith a loud Romish Ah-men ? (See Choral Service.)
Chanting" Nicene Creed. In the American, the
American Reformed Episcopal and the English R. E.
Prayer Books this is to be said. In the Canadian R.
E. P. B. it is to be read, and although our rubric
allows it to be said or sung, the latter was only in-
tended for cathedral services. It was never chanted
in parish churches until the commencement of the
Puseyite movement.
Choral Services.
Now-a-days men, women, boys and girls —
" To church repair,
Not for the doctrine, but the music there."
It is the love of music more than the love of God
which leads people to have and to patronize choral
ser\ices, but we repeat, the nearer we approach an
ornate cathedral service the farther we depart from the
simplicity of the gospel.
^ There is no authority whatever in the English
Church for Choral Services and Intoning in Parish
Churches, and when it was allowed to remain in
Cathedrals it was as Bishop Burnet shows, not in-
Choral Services. 99
tended to be permanent, but allowed only because
there were great choirs so accustomed thereto that
they could not easily alter it, but it was thought as
they dropped off and died others would fall into their
places who would officiate in a plainer voice.
One of the proposed alterations in 1689 was "that
the chanting of Divine Service in Cathedral Churches
shall be laid aside that the whole may be intelligible
to the common people."
Choral Services were part of the plan of the Ritual-
istic Campaign. A writer in the C/mrch Times of
March 30th 1867, says "Choral Service, so far as
psalms and canticles are concerned on some week-day
evening, will train people to like a more ornate
worship, and that which began as an occasional luxury
will be felt to be a regular want," and now how many
professing Christians declare Protestant services to be
too tame (the worship of GoD, tame ! ! !) and cry out
for more attractive services.
Anything however in ecclesiastical music wJiicJi is
of the nature of an exhibition, or of a musical concert
in which a portion of the congregation only take part,
is wrong, and all compositions which can be rendered
only by trained choristers should be excluded. The
training is now carried to such an extent that the key-
note is sometimes given as a guide to what is called
the proper rendering of the Confession, Lord's Prayer,
Responses to the Commandments, etc.
And here a few questions have been asked.
1. Who gave the key-note to the Publican when he
said " God be merciful to me a sinner ?"
2. Some persons have no ear for music. Will 'the
Lord Jesus turn a deaf ear to a suppliant because he
cannot sing his prayers }
3. Does tlie reader sing his prayers in his private
devotions ?
53i
SS54
lOO
Choral Services.
Attractive services, the attraction being the music
alone, are however the order of the day. The preach-
ing of the gospel being not only not a secondary
matter, but generally an unimportant one and we do
not wonder that even the secular press take note of it.
One of them asks —
" Are we not already within measurable distance of
the time when the announcement of Sunday Service
will read : —
CHURCH OF THE PILGRIMS.
Sunday, Oct. g, i8gs.
MISS HIGH SEE,
will sing at all services.
Rev. Mr. X. Pounder will preach."
The Evangelical Chiirchmajt says " Bishop Mitch-
inson has written a strong letter against the usurpation
of the responses, hymns, etc., of many church choirs.
' Choirs, alike in town and country, are rapidly
monopolizing the service and ousting the congrega-
tion. Anthems, ' services,' elaborate and ornate,
responses, amens threefold, sevenfold, manifold, are
becoming everywhere the order of the day ; and the
congregation are perforce again becoming dumb dogs.
In cathedrals we endure this (though even there it is
hard to part with the Psalms, as one must do now in
some), the choirs there enjoy a prescriptive monopoly
which no one ventures to disturb. But the standard
of rebellion will have to be raised against the tyranny
of the choir in parish churches, and a determined
effort made to restore to the congregation their un-
doubted rights in hymn, psalm, canticle and response."
(Sec Anthems and Surpliced Choirs^
CJirisin — CJi ristuias. . I O I
Chrism. Oil consecrated in the Romish, and Ori-
ental Churches and used in baptism, confirmation,
orders and extreme unction. In the Roman Church
there are two sorts ; one made of oil and balsam, the
other plain oil, both consecrated by the bishop. For
the composition of the Greek chrism see Greek CJmrch.
Christmas was not acknowledged in the time of
the Apostles, nor by the Primitive Church. We
expect to be blamed for making public this fact, the
knowledge of which is confined to the few, but repeat,
must we forever, in St. Paul's words, " ignorantly
worship."
Sir Isaac Newton, the greatest of English Philoso-
phers, and better still a Christian Philosopher, says "The
times of the Birth and Passion of Christ, with such like
niceties, being not material to religion, were little re-
garded by Christians of the first age," and Scaligersays
" To determine the true date of Christ's birth belongs
to God alone, not man." There is not a word in the
Scriptures about the precise day or of the time of the
year, and no one can tell even the season of the year,
much less the day, on which our Lord was born, but
it was not in the winter, for the shepherds of Palestine
do not remain in the fields at night then, and that the
climate was as cold at that season as it is now (and
we ourselves have shivered there in our tent under two
or three blankets and cloaks) is evident from our
Lord's own words " pray ye that your flight be not in
the winter."
The earliest allusion to Christmas is that of Clement
of Alexandria who died in 220, and he says, " there
are some who over cnrionsly assign, not only the year,
but even the day of the birth of our Saviour, which
they say was in the 28th year of Augustus, on the
25th day of Pachon (May 20)."
102
Ch ristnias — C/i it rc/ics.
" And the followers of Basilides celebrate the day
of Ill's baptism which they say was in the 15th year
of Tiberius, on the 15th of Tubi, but some say it was
on the I ith (January loth or 6th). Further some say
that He was born on the 24th or 25th of Pharmuti
(April 21 or 22)."
About the year 380, however it was enacted by the
Roman Church that the Nativity should be observed
on the 25th of December, which was the pagan festi-
val of Saturn, the Etruscan name of Tammuz, whose
festival was celebrated in Rome on the same day that
the " Drunken festival " of Bacchus or Dionysus was
observed in Babylonia. Chrysostom, in a Homily
delivered about 386, says "It is not yet ten years since
the day was made known to us," and adds moreover
that the day w^as fixed in Rome, in order that while
the Pagans were occupied with their profane cere-
monies the Christians might perform their holy rites
undisturbed.
Even two centuries after the time of Chrysostom
this date was not fully established, for Jacob, bishop
of Edessa, who died in 578, said "No one knows
exactly the day of the Nativity of the Lord : this only
is certain from what Luke writes, that He was born in
the night."
The Church of Scotland abolished Christmas at the
Reformation and its observance was forbidden in
England during the time of the Common w^ealth in
1652, by Act of Parliament, but it was restored at the
Restoration.
Churches. Cruciform temples are of Pagan origin,
having been made after the shape of the Tau of Tam-
muz. We have shown that there is a Druidical
Temple in the shape of an lona cross at Callernish, in
the Lewis, Scotland (see Cross). There is also a
ChnrcJies. 103
cruciform structure near Culloden generally called
five cairns, but Sir Daniel Wilson, in his Prehistoric
Scotland, says it may be more accurately described as
one cricrantic cruciform cairn. There is a cruciform
cairn at New Grange, Ireland, and another at Dowth,
and Wayland Smith's Cave in Berkshire, England, is
likewise cross-shaped. Two of the principal pagodas
in India, viz., those of Benares and Madura are also
built in the form of a cross and the cyclopean temple
at Gozo near Malta is said to be cruciform.
The Roman Church copied the Pagan form which
was suitable for their religion with its separate so-
called " altar " in each transept, but which is unsuited
for a Protestant Church where the majority of those
seated in the transept cannot see the minister when he
stands at the Communion Table.
Who would ever dream of building a public hall
after such a plan ?
There are some who think the churches should be
open during the week. Our most blessed Lord, how-
ever, told us to enter into our closets, shut the doors
and pray to our Father which is in secret, but that
does not suit the present advanced age, for the closets
have not been consecrated and superstition teaches
that there is more virtue in a prayer offered in a
church or in some so-called "holy" spot, or before
some so-called " holy " cross or picture than in private.
God, however, does not confer peculiar sanctity on
mere material structures. The Temple dispensation
has passed away and with that the religion of cere-
mony and locality came to an end as Christ Himself
told the woman of Samaria.
When the clergy come into the Church many
people rise, not remembering they are in the house
appointed for the worship of GoD, and that it is He
alone who ought to be worshipped there. And yet
these people will often sit while prayer is offered.
104
Colored '' Altar'' Cloths- Coniiuandmcnts.
In some churches the people stand when the clergy
t^ive out notices, but the only notice where it is en-
joined by the Rubric to stand is on the announcement
of the Holy Communion. Neither should the con-
c^rei^ation stand during the offertory although many
clergymen try to introduce the practice by having a
hymn sung at the time.
The late Mr. Charles Groves of Liverpool was an
enthusiastic promoter of Church extension. In all he
built eighteen churches, besides schools, and expended
over one million and a quarter dollars for Church
purposes in Liverpool. He used to say that " no
work one can engage in does so much to benefit our
fellow-creatures as building a church and providing a
Gospel ministry." His last appearance as a public
speaker was in i88i, at the Liverpool Diocesan Con-
ference. Several had been speaking very strongly
about the necessity of having a cathedral for the new
diocese. Mr. Groves arose, greeted by a great out-
burst of applause, and then amidst profound silence
the venerable Churchman declared : — " I cannot con-
sent to this while souls are perishing. A cathedral is
a luxury ; a church is a necessity. To your cathedral
I shall never give a farthing ; for more Churches I
will give ten thousand pounds." (See C/nirch and
Coiisccratioii).
Colored *' Altar" Cloths. Laud commenced to
introduce these. As the " Altar " is illegal it follows
that they are also, and they as well as colored stoles
have been pronounced illegal by the English Courts.
Commandments. According to the Canon the Ten
C(Mnmandments should be set up in every Church and
Chapel over the Communion Table, but they are not
to be found in Ritualistic churches where there is
Cominandments — Connnination. 105
frequently an image of the cross on the table which is
contrary to the Second Commandment and also to
the laws in England.
Commination. The P. B. says there was a godly
discipline in the Primitive Church which it is much to
be zvisJied should be restored again, and how many of
the laity are aware that this "godly " or rather Romish
discipline consisted in bringing penitents into the
Church clotJied in sackcloth zvitJi naked feet, when the
Bishop and clergy threw ashes upon them and turned
them out of the church doors, " which open penance
was the way sinners were punished in this world that
their sonls might be saved in the day of the Lord ? "
It was not a discipline of the Primitive Church how-
ever, but of the Dark Ages, dating from about the
ninth century, neither is it in accord with the N. T.
The reader may judge. About the year 28, our Lord
said: '' If the mighty works .... had been
done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented
long ago in sackcloth and ashes." That is to say, ac-
cording to the Jewish custom of the O. T. dispensa-
tion — but two score years later, about A. D. 63, St.
Paul tells us that under the N. T. dispensation the
rites of the law are passed away, and it is no longer
the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, but the
blood of Christ alone that zuill purge our conscience
from dead zuorks. Heb. IX. 12, 14.
This service was expunged in the American P. B*
a century ago and is also suppressed in the English
Revised P. B., the English and American R. P2. and
the Spanish Prayer Books. Strange to say it is re-
tained in the Irish P. B. (1878), where this bodily
exercise, condemned by St. Paul, is still called a
"godly discipline" — but the words "until the said
discipline may be restored again which is much to be
lo6 Coinminatioii.
wished " arc omitted. Did they not know moreover,
in Dubhn, in 1878, that it was not a discipline of the
Primitive Church?
In Canada the ground is generally covered with
snow at the beginning of Lent. Do our clergy really
wish, as they say they do, to sec their people driven out
into the snow, their heads covered with ashes, clothed
in old grain or coal sacks, and with bare feet, and
do they believe, as they say, that such open penance
will save them from the wrath to come ? If not, why
do they read this service ? They cannot plead ignor-
ance of its meaning for they have studied Divinity
and does not that include the P. B. ?
" Ye have heard that it hath been said by them of
old time — An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth
— Ikit I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them
that curse you."
Whose were those words and why are they ignored ?
Arc we men of the Old Time or of the New ?
And when ministers read the curses of the Old
Covenant do they never remember the words of St.
Paul "l^less them which persecute you: BLESS AND
CURSE NOT."
Ours is a Gou of Love, and we have never forgotten
a prayer clipped out of an American daily paper long
since —
"O God, fill my heart with fear of Thee, not with
the fear of torment, hut vj'ith. the holy, child-like fear
of offending so kind a FATHER, so gracious and
merciful a SAVIOUR."
We have known Ministers who regretted having to
read the Commination Service" but as it was in the
W B. they considered they had no option ; and others
more firm in their convictions, who would not read it.
Some years ago a clergyman in Sheffield wrote
us : " I do not think there are half a dozen of the
Coininination—Comnnmion. \oj
thirty-seven churches in this town where the Com-
mination Service is read. Of course we never use
it in our church, as we have service in the evening
and make no difference between Ash Wednesday
and other Wednesdays."
The word " penance " used here occurs twice in the
Articles, and scholars tell us in one case it signifies
penance in the R.C. sense and in the other case re-
pentance. But how many who follow the P.B. are
aware of this t
The ceremonial use of ashes is still continued in
the R.C. Church but is now confined to crossing the
forehead with ashes, and it is a pity that when we
gave up the ceremony we did not also drop the name.
In the R. E. P. B. Ash Wednesday is called " The
First Day of Lent." (See Lent and Preface.)
Communion. Our most blessed Lord instituted
this in the evening. With Him it was like the Pass-
over, a vSUPPER, but now Priestcraft prefers a Break-
fast ! Whose example shall we follow — Christ's or
man's ?
Canon Tristram points out that the author of the
early administration was the heathen Emperor Had-
rian, who by his persecutions prevented the primitive
Christians from assembling at any other time.
The Sacerdotalist reason however is evident.
Priesthood to a great degree stands or falls with the
establishment of a morning sacrifice. Restore the
Supper and the sacrifice ceases, for a supper is not a
sacrifice, but a Repast, and this one is a " Remem-
brance " or " Memorial " in a Repast. Sacrifice
ceasing, a Sacrificing PriestJwod ceases with it, and
Christ's institution, a PreacJiing Ministry, alone re-
mains.
There are some who call the Supper the highest
loS Coiuninnion.
ordinance of our religion. On the contrary, how-
ever, is not this an error, for is not that other ordi-
nance of God, tJie preacJiiiig of the Word, the most
important? (Cor. i., 21.)
Our Lord did not administer Sacraments (John iv.,
2) ; neither did Peter (Acts x., 48), nor Paul (Cor. i.,
17). Their work was "to preach." Inferior ordi-
nances were administered by inferior officers of the
Church. (Acts x.)
Does St. Peter say anything respecting the Lord's
Supper ? — No. Does St. James ? — No. Does St.
John who leaned on his Lord's breast at the Last
Supper ? — No. And these were the three most inti-
mate disciples of our Lord.
John vi. does not refer to it, as the Holy Com-
munion was not then instituted. The Lord's Supper
is not even named in St. John's Gospel ! Is not this
most conspicuous omission alone sufficient to prove
that the Supper is not the highest and most sacred
of all the Christian ordinances?
Does St. Jude? — No; except perhaps when he
says ** these are spots in your feasts of charity," and
if so he does not call it a " sacrifice " but a " feast."
Does St. Paul ? — Yes, but in only one of his eleven
epistles (i. Cor. xi. and xx.), and then he does not say
a word about offering up the bread and wine as a
propitiation for sin ; nor does he call it a sacrifice,
neither does he mention fasting communion !
The Acts of the Apostles contain the history of
the Christian Church for the first thirty-two years of
its existence, and they contain only the above two
references to the Lord's Supper, describing it merely
as " the breaking of bread." The twenty-one Epistles
were addressed by the Apostles to the Christians, and
in only one of them do we find any reference to the
IIol}- Communion. Among these Epistles are three
Coninmnion. 1 09
addressed to the Evangelists Timothy and Titus
instructing iJiein in the exercise of their duties, yet not
a word is said about the Holy Supper. We use the
word Evangelists (ll. Timothy iv. 5) because they
were certainly not Diocesan bishops.
While therefore we must never forget
OUR Lord's command, " This do in remembrance of
Me," still we must not exaggerate the importance of
this Sacrament, nor call it a sacrifice as the Ritualists
do, for it is a remembrance or memorial of a sacrifice
only — as our ONE SACRIFICE was offered up once for
all on Calvary, and the Holy Supper is therefore not
in itself a sacrifice for sin, but a feast upon the
sacrifice.
There is a confusion of terms. The Lord's Supper
is not the highest act of Christian worship — but with
the Romanists and Sacerdotalists it is the highest
CEREMONY ! And where there is the most ceremony,
there as a rule, is the least worship.
The Supper is a solemn feast, a feast of " thanks-
giving," or in Greek a " eucharist," in which we call
to mind and feast upon the love exhibited by the
death upon the cross, and as Cranmer said, " Christ is
not in the bread and wine, neither corporally or spirit-
ually, but in them who worthily eat and drink the
blood and wine." Corporally and carnally however
He is really in heaven alone.
Christ is figuratively in the bread and wine, and
spiritually in them that partake of it, not only then but
ahvays, as He Himself said " I will be with you alway,
even unto the end of the world."
The Lord's Supper is not a mystery, neither is it
referred to as such in the N. T.
In the P. B. Revised the words " holy mysteries "
are changed to " this holy ordinance " and in other
books to " Holy Supper." It is a mystery only to
I lO Coiiuiiuiiioii.
those who beHeve in transubstantiation. The bread
and wine do not undergo any mysterious change.
The bread remains bread. If it was turned into flesh
it would avail nothing for the Lord Jesus Himself
said " It is the Spirit that quickeneth, tJie flesJi profiteth
nothing (John vi, 63), and the wine remains wine. If
otherwise, and it was changed into blood it would be
forbidden food, for twice in Acts, nearly a score of
years after the crucifixion, are we commanded to
abstain from blood. And finally, the reader may say
that Christ's words were " This is my body." Hut if
that same reader held a couple of photos in his hand
would he say " This represents myself. This represents
my father." — or "This is myself. This is my
father ?"
" No mystic power these conceal —
They are but bread and wine ;
Thy Spirit, Lord, alone can give
One spark of life divine."
In the Second Book of Edward there was no pro-
vision for placing the hand on the paten and chalice.
As we have shown under transubstantiation our Lord
did not consecrate the bread and wine, although
Wheatly says He did.
The next Rubric did not mention Bishops, Priests
and Deacons ; that was Sheldon's work. It reads
thus " Then shall the Minister first receive ....
and then proceed to deliver the same to the other
Ministers (that they may help the chief Minister) and
after that " etc. The clause in brackets showing that
no exaltation of the priesthood was intended ; and the
Rubric " If any of the bread and wine remain," etc.,
made no mention of consecrated nor unconsecrated
but was simply " If any of the bread and wine remain
the curate shall have it for his own use."
Coinmunion — Coimminion Tables. 1 1 1
The word " damnation " in this service is an un-
happy one and has been known to frighten people
from taking- the communion. Archbishop Whately
said of it " that many clergymen take the law in their
own hands and read " condemnation."
The Ritualistic practice of receiving the bread in
crossed palms is a distinct violation of the expression
" Take" and without any authority whatever from
Scripture, and we remember when a friend refused to
give the bread thus and repeated the word " Take,"
until the communicant took it in the proper manner.
(See Fasting Coinmunion, Real Presence and Trans-
siibstantiation.)
Communion Tables. The oldest Communion
Table in existence is undoubtedly that preserved
in Rome, in the Church of the Lateran, built in the
fourth century, and is probably as old as the Church
itself, although in Rome we are expected to believe
it was the original table at which the Last Supper was
eaten. Wooden tables continued in use in England
for centuries, even to the latter part of the eleventh
century, as we have shown under '' Altars," and the
Rev. Dr. Morgan Dix, of New York, only showed
his ignorance when he spoke so contemptuously a few
years ago of the " four-legged wooden tables."
Eusebius says moreover that in the Church of St.
Sophia the table was placed in the centre of the
church, and this position it held for the first six cen-
turies ; in the midst of the people who sat or reclined
about it, never kneeling, each Christian being privi-
leged to sit as a "king" at the board of the King ot
Kings. Trapeza or table is the word most commonly
used by the Greek Fathers.
At the Reformation the stone altars which had
then been in existence in England for some centuries
112 ConuniDiioii Tables.
were removed and the tables were restored, and at
the Second Revision in 1552, wherever the word
" altar " occurred in the P.B. it was expunged and the
word " Table " substituted in its place.
In 1564 the Act of Parliament was "The Parish
shall provide a decent table staiiding on a frame, for a
Communion Table."
One of the Canons of the Synod of 1571 required
that the Table shall be of "joiner's work." And
why ? Because an altar is of mason's work !
When Laud became Dean of Gloucester, in 16 17,
his fii'st official act was to place the Lord's Table
against the east end of the chancel, and the Bishop,
Dr. Miles Smith (all honor to him), never entered the
Cathedral afterwards !
The priest-party soon began to follow Laud's ex-
ample by placing the Tables altar-wise and not table-
wise as they were previously ; boxing them up and
turning them into sham altars, nicknamed by the
people " Box Altars " and railing them in, which meant
that the humble laity should be kept at their proper
distance, as when they were placed table-wise the
people knelt near and sometimes around them. The
priest party also introduced rich altar-cloths, copes,
credence tables and the like.
In 1876, Her Majesty's Privy Council decided that
the Communion Table was a " table in the ordinary
sense of the word, flat and moveable," and this last
word is most important, for its being moveable makes
it impossible that it should be regarded as an altar.
It was originally intended to be moved at Communion
time " at which time the same shall be placed in so
good part within the Church or Chancel as thereby
the Minister may be more conveniently heard of the
Communicants," and the Judgment of the Judicial
Committee in the case of Liddell v. Westerton, and
Connnunion Tables. 1 1 j
adopted in other cases, was that " The Communion
Table was to be provided by the Parish, was to be
moveable, not by machinery, but by hand, and was
actually to be very frequently moved!'
There are many Tables in England which agree
with the Judgment. At St. Martin's Church, Haver-
stock Hill, they have an honest table of wood in the
middle of the chancel, with eight or nine feet of space
on every side of it. At St. Thomas', Lambeth, the
table which is at the north, is placed a short distance
from the wall, and at the consecration prayer the
minister stands behind it, facing the congregation.
In St. Nathaniel's, Liverpool, the table stands some
distance from the wall and has behind it a row of
seats, which are regularly occupied.
When this arrangement was made in 1877 the Rev.
Mr. Hobson applied for a faculty to do so. The
chancellor of the diocese however demurred to grant
it on the ground that such seats would be illegal.
Mr. Hobson told him that he (Mr. H.) had yet to
learn that the chancel was more sacred than the rest
of the church, for it had not, he said, been twice con-
secrated, and after some delay a decision was given in
his favor.
At St. Columba's, Liverpool, the table stands in the
centre of the rails, leaving a passage behind it. The
pulpit and desk are both behind or inside the Com-
munion-rails. At St. Luke's, Tavistock place, Ply-
mouth, the table is placed a little distance from the
wall, so that one can get round it, and such is the
case at St. Peter's Martyr's Memorial Church, Clerk-
enwell. At the church of St. Mary-le-Port, Bristol,
the table is placed table-wise, and not altar- wise. In
Jersey the tables invariably stand in the body of the
church lengthwise. Many more cases might be given.
1 14 Confess ion — Coufirnmtion
The tabic in Toronto Cathedral in Dean Grasett's
time was on castors.
The rubric says that at Communion time the Table
shall have a fair white linen cloth upon it, but why
is the cloth so often brought down to the floor con-
cealing the legs and making it look like an altar ?
Are other eating tables arranged in like manner?
We have seen in London Holy Tables with the linen
cloth npon the table and hanging down a little at each
end, but not in front so that we could see under the
Table.
The Table should be covered up (legs excepted),
save when the Sacrament is to be administered, Test
it should be regarded as an " altar." Canon 82, says
it shall be covered in time of divine service with a
carpet of silk, or other decent stuff.
One of the rubrics in the Canadian R. E. P. B. is
very carefully worded. " The Table shall be of wood
and shall not have upon it a slab of any other material
than wood, nor shall any candle, candlestick, flowers,
or cross be placed upon or apparently upon, the Table,
nor shall it be so constructed as to represent an altar,
and during the time of Divine Serv^ice it shall be
always covered with a plain cloth, nor shall the color
be changed to indicate the Church seasons."
Romanists and Romanizers like to place the letters
I. H. S. (See The Cross) orv the illegal "Altar" Front-
als, because they are connected with the Mass, that
monogram being stamped on the large wafer used by
the R. C. priests. (See Altar, Eastward Position,
Reredos and Transiibstaiitiation.
Confession. (See Auricular Confession)
Confirmation. This is said b}' some to be an
Apostolic institution (Acts, vi, 6, xiii, 3 and Heb. vi.
Confirmation. 115
2.) while others deny that the " laying on of hands "
there mentioned referred to Confirmation. It is how-
ever of very early date being mentioned by Tertullian
(ob. 225) and then followed immediately upon Bap-
tism, and this was the case whether the neophyte was
an adult or an infant, and it is still administered in
the Greek and African Churches, as soon after Bap-
tism as possible.
Of our modern idea that confirmation is the ratifi-
cation by the baptized child, when he has attained the
age capable of deliberate choice, of the promises made
for him by his sponsors there is not the slightest trace
in Christian antiquity.
Those who are fond of the Fathers may be inter-
ested to know that Clemens, the head of the Alex-
andrian catechetical school the preceptor of Origen
and the most learned man of his age, (ob. 220), who
denounced the practice of wearing false hair, said that
in such cases when the priest in bestowing his bene-
diction lays his hand upon the head, the blessing
does not reach the wearer of the hair, but rests upon
the person to whom the hair belongs ! ! !
If Clemens Alexandrinus is not in error it may be
a question even now whether female candidates should
wear caps as the bishop's blessing might not be able
to go through them.
And there may yet be some who will agree with
him, for there are too many who resemble the
men of Athens (Acts xvii, 22), and it is related of
Sanderson, bishop of Lincoln, (ob. 1663) that a day
before his death he desired his chaplain to give him
absolution and at his performing that office the bishop
pulled off his cap that the chaplain might lay his
hands upon his bare head ! Here we have a bishop,
trusting not in Christ, but in a fellow sinner, and yet
fearing that sinner's blessing might not be powerful
Ii6 ConfirDiatioii — Conge d' clire.
enough to force its way through the little scull-cap
worn by old men instead of wigs !
Conge d' ^lire. Permission to elect, granted by
the Queen to the dean and chapter of the cathedral
in England to elect a bishop. This, however, is a
mere form as was shown in the notorious Hampden
case in 1847. Lord John Russell appointed this man
to the See of Hereford. He had been censured by
the University of Oxford for heterodoxy and was
latitudinarian in his ecclesiastical politics, and was
therefore obnoxious to both Puseyites and Evangeli-
cals. No less the thirteen bishops headed the clergy
and laity in urging the Premier to revoke the appoint-
ment and the Dean of Hereford declared he would
rather incur the penalties of praemunire than obey
the pern lis sioji to elect, virtually commanding the elec-
tion of Dr. Hampden. Lord John however was
obstinate. He thanked the bishops for their advice
and curtly acknowledged the dean's letter as an in-
timation of his " intention of violating the law." A
majority of the Chapter were induced to comply with
the conge d' elire and the reluctant Archbishop was
obliged to consecrate Dr. Hampden at Bow Church,
when, notwithstanding that the objectors appeared by
their proctors, and claimed to be heard, the election
was pronounced unanimous !
The gross mockery of this law. for the Chapter
have to meet in tJie Cathedral and pray on their knees
for guidance in their choice, when they have no choice
at all, has just been shown in the case of the bishop-
elect of Winchester. The Right Hon. Mr. Matthews
sent the " leave to elect " to Winchester, but forgot
to add the name, and the Protestant Dean and Chap-
ter had to telegraph to the Roman CatJwlic Home
Secretary to know whom they were to elect — and this
is Apostolical Succession in February i8qi.
Consecration. 1 1 7
Consecration. Our Saviour did not bless or con-
secrate the bread and wine at the Last Supper, as we
have stated under communion and transubstantiation,
for the Httle word it in Matthew — blessed it — is an
error and the it is omitted in the Revised Version.
We will refer here therefore only to Churches and
cemeteries.
" God called the dry land earth . . and GOD
saw that it was good." Priestcraft, however, pro-
fesses to improve upon this, and pretends by a Church
ceremony to make certain parts ofGOD'Sgood ground
more holy still ! Does the rest of God's good ground
then remain less holy or even accursed in their sight !
How, in a cemetery, do they sanctify the ground, and
how is their so-called blessing confined to so many
feet and inches 1 Supposing it can be done by walls
at the four sides, what is to prevent it slipping
through at the bottom } No Bishop has yet attempted
to consecrate a part of the mighty ocean — to mark
off so many feet as holy and so many as accursed, for
it means nothing else when the Bishop leaves a corner
unconsecrated for the burial of unbaptized infants,
non-conformists and the like. Who gave to Bishops
the power to stamp any part of God's earth as un-
holy ? And what becomes of the Churchmen who
are buried in the unconsecrated ocean ?
God does not confer peculiar sanctity either on
places or on mere material structures. The Temple
Dispensation has passed away, and with that the
religion of ceremony and locality came to an end, but
" priests " must have ceremonies, for they magnify the
priest, and whatever unduly elevates him unduly
exalts the Bishop.
The Rev. Hely H. A. Smith says, "There are mul-
titudes who think that men can hew stones out of a
quarry and cut down trees out of a forest, use some
1 1 8 Co7isecration.
of these materials to build palaces and theatres, and
take ' the residue thereof and construct a building,
with nave, aisles, chancel, belfry, and that as soon as
a fellow-sinner has come and said a few words over
it, then, as a matter of necessity, GOD is bound to
take up His especial abode in it ; but it can never be
proved that GOD has given His consent to the trans-
action ; a place is not necessarily hallowed ground
because man says it shall be.
In reply to the argument for lavishing money and
taste on churches and services, he adds :
" Can anything be too good for GOD ? No ; noth-
ing can indeed be too costly to give to GOD ; but
what is real giving to GOD ? He does not require us
to present Him with a gorgeous reredos, with beauti-
ful carving, with encaustic tiles, with embroidered
altar cloths, with painted wmdows, with wax candles ;
they are no pleasure to Him, no present to Him ; all
the world belongs to Him ; the silver and the gold
are His, as well as the cattle on a thousand hills, and
the spirit of His reply to the Jews of old (Ps. 1. 9-12)
is equally applicable now\"
In our churches we meet together for united prayer
one day in seven. In our homes we join together for
family prayer every day of the seven. If the church
must be consecrated, ought not the dwelling to be
treated in like manner, and what shall be said of our
Atlantic steamers where Divine service is held in the
cabin ?
Bishop Coxe deconsecrated a church in Rochester,
N.Y., a few years ago, saying that a building once
consecrated to GOD cannot lawfully be given back
without a counteracting sentence of the Bishop. A
church was lately restored, and the old pulpit and
high-backed pews were removed. If the Bishop is
right, should they not have been also deconsecrated
Coiisecratiou. 1 19
before being sold for old lumber ? Perhaps some of
the holy (?) wood was used for kindling fires !
How can a Bishop deconsecrate ? He can baptize
a man, but can he also ?/;^baptize him ? An Arch-
bishop can ordain. Can he also ?/;^ordain ?
A few years ago a man committed suicide in the
R. C. Cathedral at Ottawa, and the building was
therefore re-consecrated — but is it not mockery to
consecrate a material work to GOD, who is a Spirit,
not zvorsJiipped by man's hands, when the very conse-
crators acknowledge by their act that a miserable
sinner may undo their work, and make it necessary, in
their sight, to consecrate again V
The late Bishop Strachan of Toronto declared he
would never consecrate a church until it was free
from debt, and his own Cathedral of St. James has
never been consecrated. What is the effect of this ?
Have the prayers offered up there for more than half
a century not been heard ? Bishop Strachan was
himself buried there. Is he laying in a kind of Pro-
testant purgatory until the funded debt is paid off?
The late Bishops of Toronto and Algoma and the
present Bishop of Toronto were consecrated there.
Were those consecrations invalid ? Is Dr. Sweatman
a true Bishop, and if the Cathedral is ever consecrated,
ought he not then to be re-consecrated ?
The Roman Church decline to bury play-actors.
When Moliere died in 1673, the Archbishop of Paris
refused to allow his remains to be interred in conse-
crated ground. King Louis the Fourteenth sent for
the prelate, who said it was impossible, being contrary
to the laws of the Church. " How deep, then," said
the King, "is your consecrated ground?" With-
out reflection probably the prelate replied, " About
eight feet, I suppose." "Then," said the king, " he
shall be buried twelve feet deep, which is four feet
below your consecrated ground " — and it was done.
1 20 Consecration.
Acquaviva, Duke of Atri, in Naples (died 1528)
one of the greatest luminaries of his age, said that to
refuse to bury a man in consecrated ground was to
assume that man can affect the judgment of the
Creator by throwing up a rampart of a few clods of
earth against the boundless exercise of His loving
mercy.
An American Bishop caps the climax. A few years
ago Bishop Young, of Florida, said, " We want (the
numbers are ours) (i) An Office for the laying of
corner-stones of churches, chapels and other religious
houses ; (2) An Office for blessing for their religious
rse structures of this sort prospectively temporary, or
built of more perishable materials, and for solemnly
setting apart other edifices intended for religious uses
exclusively ; (3) We want an Office for the Burial of
Infants, and (4) one for the Burial of the Clergy, or
modifications of our present one to meet these occa-
sions ; (5) also one for the Consecration of cemeteries,
and (6) one for the formal acceptance and offering to
God of vessels for the service of the altar and other
instrumenta of Divine Service ?
Verily, one extreme begets another, and the Bishop
approaches dangerously near to the idolatry of the
ancient Jews when they adopted the rites and cere-
monies of Paganism, set up Assyrian gods in the
temple (as some of us set up images of the cross and
crucifixes), prepared the "chamber of imagery," (and
what are our churches with the windows full of paint-
ings of men and women called saints ?) and fell pros-
trate to worship the rising sun, as too many still bow
to the Orient.
As Dr. Harris Rule says, " It is easy to conceive
how attractive such rites would be to the poor Israel-
ites. A busy Pagan priesthood meddling with their
nffairs, having a separate ceremony for every passing
Conscci'ation. 1 2 1
incident, no doubt employing real remedies to do what
enchantment could not effect, and professing to hold
commerce with good spirits, to exert power over bad
ones, and to have interest with a heavenly intercessor,
would charm the poor simpletons. . . ."
But Dr. Young is a Bishop, and must be treated
with due respect. We therefore crave pardon for
asking with reference to No. 2. Should Divine
service be held in camp, in a " temporar}^ building of
perishable materials," in other words a tent, would the
tent have to be consecrated and would the blessing
remain attached to the canvass, or would it have to
be deconsecrated and re-consecrated every time it
was struck and pitched again. (3) The horrible
Rubric in our P. B., implying that unbaptized infants
are doomed to perdition, is expunged in the Ameri-
can P. B., but does the Bishop hold this Romish
doctrine, or why does he want a separate Office for
Infants ? (4) The Bishop undoubtedly considers the
priesthood a superior caste — even in death — but are
not all Christians " kings and priests unto GOD V
(5) Supposing the depth of the Bishop's consecrated
ground to be the same as that of the Archbishop of
Paris, and a husband and wife, the one being a non-
conformist, wished to be buried together, the one
might be buried just below and the other just above
and on the line of the eight feet, thus resting on the
coffin in the unconsecrated ground below it. The
Bishop's holy ground would not then be desecrated,
for according to Romish Ritual a cemetery is dese-
crated by the interment in it of a heretic ! A dog is
an unclean animal, and, according to that doctrine,
should any one quietly bury his dog at night in a
cemetery, it would thereby be desecrated, and no one
on earth but the dog's master would be aware of it !
How would this affect those who were buried there ?
122 Consixration.
(6) Has Bishop Young forgotten that the word "altar"
is not in the P. B. — and what are " instrumenta " ?
As by donning the surplice the singing boys become
Assistants to the Priesthood, are the white gowns
" instrumenta," and if so, must they be formally ac-
cepted and offered every time they come from the
laundry, and how about the brooms and dusters used
for cleaning what some are pleased to call the holy
chancel — are they instrumenta, and if so, will they
have to be deconsecrated when worn out ?
That most enlightened prelate Archbishop Whately,
who died in 1863, never used a consecration service.
He attended formally to accept the building and to
complete the legal documents by which it was set
apart to the service of Almighty God, and that was
all ; neither did he consecrate cemeteries.
In 1880, Dr. Magee, then Bishop of Peterborough,
expressed his willingness to leave cemeteries uncon-
secrated and a few years after Dr. Woodford, bishop
of Ely declared he would not consecrate any more.
It was not he said, the imparting of a mystical holi-
ness to the soil, and he saw no object nor meaning
in it.
Mr. James Bateman, F. R. S., said lately at a meet-
ing of the Church Association, that more than thirty
years ago when his father and himself built a church
at Knypersley, they declined to have it consecrated,
simply because in the event of the Mass becoming
legalized they might not be able to bar its entry into
what would no longer be their church, for by the law
in England, a building by consecration ceases to
belong to its former owner and becomes the property
of the Established Church.
Some of our readers may remember the dcconse-
cratiofi which took place at Bologna when Pius IX,
returned to Rome about forty years ago. An ex-
Consecration. 1 2 3
priest who had fought under Garibaldi ventured to
return home but was seized and condemned to death.
Before his execution, however, as his hands were
supposed to have been consecrated by having held
the wafer in the mass, the skin was torn off of the palms
by order of Cardinal Bedini, Governor of Bologna.
The Cardinal was afterwards sent to the U. S. A. as
ablegate, but in Buffalo and some other places the
Roman Catholics refused to receive him.
The foregoing is from the first edition ; unaltered.
Since then a man named Easton committed suicide
in St. Paul's Cathedral, and after some delay the
Bishop of London held a kind of reconsecration, (Oct.
13, 1890) which, however, he called a Service of Re-
conciliation, which was condemned by The Times and
many other leading papers. The Times said that if
the Cathedral was polluted by the deplorable act of
Easton, no service should have been held in it until it
was purified from this. Nevertheless the Dean and
Chapter continued their services as usual ; and that
since the Reformation no such service had been
necessary.
The English CJmrcJiman said, " The ' Service of
Reconciliation ' which took place in St. Paul's Cathe-
dral has no warrant in the Word of GOD, or in the
lawful practice of the Church of England. The
Bishop of London, who weakly yielded to the petition
of the Dean and Chapter, seems to have grasped the
truth according to the observations he addressed to
the congregation in acknowledging as the chief pastor
of the diocese * the unworthiness of us all in the sight
of Almighty God It was fitting they
should publicly acknowledge they were all sinners.'
Yes ; that is true ' meet, right and our bounden duty;'
but to imagine that man can offer an 'act of repara-
tion ' to God for sin, for which the blood of the
124 Coiisccratioti — Credence Table.
covenant is the only atonement, is nothinj^ less than
an act of superstition and presumption. We under-
stand there have been four or five suicides within the
Cathedral during the last forty years, but this is the
first occasion in which the Metropolitan Cathedral —
desecrated by the presence of idols — has been sub-
jected to this unauthorized and superstitious service,"
and adds elsewhere, " the cleansing process was noth-
ing but a piece of episcopal conjuring."
Lord Grimthorpe styled it " a voluntary and illegal
service," and also " a ridiculous and superstitious per-
formance."
We stated that Archbishoo Whately never used a
consecration service and have since learned that it was
because he deemed it forbidden by the Act of Uni-
formity. He used to go in plain clothes to the new
church and sign the deed of consecration and come
away.
A consecration service as usually performed seems,
however, to be recognized by various Acts of Parlia-
ment, but Dr. Hook acknowledges that there is no
authorized office, and Canon Eden says "What is called
the consecration of a church at present is purely a legal
(not a religious) act, duly setting aside a certain building
from secular uses. There is no form of prayer for
consecration of churches prepared by competent
authority ; it is left to every bishop to use any which
he thinks fit, though the form which v/as prepared by
the bishops in 17 12 is that most generally used. But
all existing unauthorized forms are illegal, and con-
trary to the Act of Uniformity."
Credence Table. Poisoning was anciently common
and in palaces they generally had an officer whose
duty it was to taste the wines. Credetiza in Italian
signifies proving or tasting food or liquors to show that
Credence Tahle. • 125
•they were not poisoned and he who did it was called
a Credensiere or Taster.
From the palace they were introduced into the
church, but no earlier than the year 1500, and they
are first mentioned in the Pontifical of Leo X., who
died in 1522, and were not fully established until the
Bull of Clement VIII. 1604, and it must be confessed
they were necessary in the Roman Church, for Bower
shows that a sub-deacon put poison into the chalice
of Pope Victor II. (A.D. 1055) but he was saved by a
miracle — or as an heretic might say by an antidote !
The Emperor Henry VII. was poisoned in the Mass
by a monk in 13^3. Bishop Baggs, Chamberlain to
Pope Gregory XVI. in his " Pontifical Mass," pub-
lished in Rome in 1840, tells us of an Augustine friar
in early days poisoned at the altar by a woman, and
adds ** Even in our own time this sacrilege has been
attempted." The Archbishop of Quito died in 1877
from strychnine in the cup {Tablet, May 19, 1877), a
priest at Villenamoche, Sens, France, was poisoned in
the cup the following year {Univers, Nov. 4, 1878), and
the same year sixty persons, pupils, parents and nuns,
at a first Communion were taken ill from a small
quantity of arsenic mixed with the wafers, by a con-
fectioner named Chavant {London Times, September
13, 1878).
In 1883, at Corlenti, Catania, Sicily, a priest named
Failla, was poisoned with strychnine in the chalice,
by a Canon named Gaetano Limoli, who hated the
deceased. Limoli had a brother who was a druggist,
who often left his shop to the care of the canon who
had thereby the means of supplying himself with the
poison. His trial was only concluded nearly two
years after when he was acquitted for want of sufficient
"^xooi {London Times, ]2.x\. 15, 1885).
This list must of course be a very imperfect one —
126 Credence Table.
but do we require Credence Tables in Protestant"
Churches ?
The Popes profess to be infallible but so great is
their fear of poison that they on the contrary show-
that they are in one respect at least — fallible. They
cannot themselves judge whether the elements are free
from poison — and require no less than three Tasting
Tables. Bishop Baggs describes the w^hole ceremony
of the Pope's Mass which is too long to insert here.
The first table, that of the Pope, is on the right side of
the altar. On it are sundry basins, plates and cups,
wine and water.
On the left side is the Credence of the officiating
Cardinal deacon, and that of M. Sagrista* a bishop,
the principal taster.
A sub-deacon takes the box of wafers from the third
Credence. M. Sagrista and his attendants then take
the chalice, etc., to the Pope's Credence. In
their presence the Pope's butler tastes the wine and
w^ater, which on being decanted is by him a second
time tasted. All that is now requisite is taken to the
" altar," where the w^afers, the w-ater and the wine are
again tasted — (this is called the probd) — by being
eaten and drunk by M. Sagrista, " with his face turned
toivards the Pope'' Three wafers are offered to the
Pope from which he selects one and the officiating
Cardinal and the bishop must sw^allow the two
others.
What then do the Popes believe ?
Their excessive caution proves unmistakably that
they do believe that the elements may be a vehicle
for poison.
* We presume the Pope's Sexton is a Inshop, and that this means
" Mr. Sexton, a bishop," for sagrista is the old word for sacristano oi
sexton. Secretan, Saxton and Sexton are however family names and
possibly also Sagrista.
Cremation — Cross. 1 27
Is it possible then that they can also believe that
those vehicles for poison can be as they profess the real
Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ ?
Bishop Baggs was we believe an Irishman. We
have referred to Bower's " Lives of the Popes," but
the reader can also consult Foulke's " Church's Creed
or Crown's Creed," Arthur's " Italy in Transition," and
an illustrated pamphlet " Credence or Tasting Tables
(London, Seeleys, 1881), by our old friend the late
Rev. Mourant Brock, who took his title from an article
of ours in a London paper.
Except on extraordinary occasions the Pope's meals
are solitary ones, it being considered that there is no
being on earth sufficiently elevated to sit as an equal
at table with him — but every dish must still be
credenced !
Cremation. When the late Bishop of Lincoln
published his views as to the possibility of cremation
interfering with the resurrection of the body an humble
Low Churchman, the Earl of Shaftesbury, exclaimed,
*• What an audacious limitation of the powers of the
Almighty! What has become of the blessed Martyrs
who were burnt at the stake 1
CPOSieP. fSee Pastoral Staff.)
Cross. A cross on, or so placed as to appear con-
nected with the Communion Table has been declared
illegal by the English Ecclesiastical Courts.
The image of the cross is a Pagan symbol, being
the T (tau) or initial and emblem of Tammuz the
sun-god, the most ancient forms of which letter were
sometimes crossed below the top like our small t, and
it was adopted by the Roman Church and called the
cross of Christ to draw the heathen into the Church
128 Cross.
by making them believe there was Httlc difference be-
tween the two rehgions ; for it must be remembered
that ahhough a Christian Church was founded in
Rome before the arrival of Paul, still the Pagan
religion was not finally abolished for some centuries,
and there were Christian churches and Pagan temples
in Rome until nearly the year 500, during which time
many heathen errors crept into the Church.
Tammuz was also called Bacchus, or The Lamented
One, from the Phoenician bakkah, to weep or lament —
*' And, behold, there sat the women weeping for Tam-
muz " (Ez. viii., 14), and was often prayed to as Baal,
or Lord.
There is a statue in the British Museum in wonder-
ful preservation of Samsi-Vul IV., King of Assyria,
B.C. 835, as large as life, wearing a pectoral cross
(very similar to a Maltese cross) suspended round his
neck. This Samsi-Vul was a son of Shalmaneser (2
Kings xvii., 3), and contemporary with Elisha.
Champollion gives an engraving of an ancient Egyp-
tian on his knees, praying, with a cross in each hand,
and Wilkinson engraves Egyptians of the fifteenth
century, before Christ, wearing crosses round their
necks.
The image was not introduced into the Christian
Church in Rome until about three centuries after the
time of the Apostles, and it is impossible to say when
it was adopted in the English Church. There are, it
is true, many stone crosses of very early date in the
British Isles, but some of them are undoubtedly pre-
Christian crosses of Tammuz, who was formerly wor-
shipped there, and Rawlinson thinks the Thames as
well as the Tamar, Tame and Teme received their
names from him, which is very probable, for it is well
known that rivers and springs or fountains were dedi-
cated to the Sun, which is the origin of S') many Holy
Cross. T 29
wells, and a Druidical temple 380 feet long, in the
shape of a cross, together with the circle of the sun
similar to what is now called an lona cross, is still in
existence at Callernish, in the Lewis, Scotland, for
Tammuz was worshipped there as Grian or Grannus,
the Shining One or the Shiner. The Romans acknow-
ledged him to be the same as Apollo and an altar was
discovered near Edinburgh dedicated to Apollo
Granno. (See Paganism})
There are sculptured stone crosses in Scotland
which we had never seen stamped as Pagan when we
wrote a pamphlet upon the subject twelve years ago.
At Meigle is a cross engraved on a stone and above
each arm is the boar of Tammuz with its long snout,
and facing it the sow, with its smaller head, of his wife
Beltis, or the Lady, the Madonna of those days. Be-
low are five serpents and a hound, and Ceridwin the
great goddess of South Britain was fabled to have
transformed herself into a greyhound. On the reverse
is a serpent, a fish and other emblems.
At Glammis is another cross over the head of which
is an animal partly defaced, but apparently a boar, and
above one limb is a lion which was the emblem of the
sun-god under the name of Mithra, and facing him is
a centaur holding a battle-axe in each hand, which
may have been intended for Centaurus himself who
was a son of Apollo. On this cross is also a caul-
dron in which two men are immersed, heads down-
ward, with their legs sticking out. This was un-
doubtedly the cauldron of Ceridwin, under her Scotch
name, of which it was believed that if any one who
was dead was dipped into it he would come to life
again safe and sound."^
*Sculptured Stones of Scotland published by the Spauldinj; Clnb.
9
130
Cross.
And yet they have been always looked upon as
Christian crosses.
There is a cruciform cairn at New Grange, Ireland,
which, if a church, would be described as having chan-
cel, nave and transepts. At Malta and also at Gozo
there are gigantic crosses in circles, or as they are
sometimes called four-spoked sun-wheels, hewn in the
solid rock, believed to be of Phoenician origin, and the
Cyclopean temple at Gozo is said to be cruciform.
As if the cross of the Sun-god was insufficient the
Roman Church have also a brilliant plate of silver in
the form of a sun fixed opposite to the wafer on their
altars, so that everyone who adores at the altar must
bow down before the image of the sun.
It would seem that the cross was not used as a
Christian symbol in England, except perhaps in
church ceremonies, until the end of the eighth century,
for Matthew of Westminster says in his Chronicle:
" A.D. 790. The sign of the cross was seen on the
garments of several men, ivJuch zvas a strange tiling
both to speak and hear of.' It was abolished at the
Reformation, when the commandment condemning all
symbols for the use of religion^ and the chapter in
which they are forbidden no less than five times, was
again brought into remembrance.
Archbishop Grindal, called by Lord Bacon the
greatest and gravest prelate of the land, and by
Milton the best of the reformers, ordered " All
CROSSES TO BE UTTERLY DEFACED, BROKEN AND
DESTROYED," and it is only since about the last fifty
years that they have been introduced into Protestant
churches and cemeteries, on the covers of Prayer-
Books, and elsewhere, by the Puseyites. When St.
Paul said he gloried in the cross, it was in the DOCTRINE
of the cross that he meant. St. Paul would not seek
THE LIVING among the dead, but he sought Him on
Cross. 131
His Father's throne, and his boast was : " Though we
have known Christ after the flesh, yet now, henceforth,
know we Him no more." When the Apostle spoke
of the material cross he did not style it a dear cross as
too many do now, but he called it an accursed tree
(Gal. iii. 13). If it represented sin and death, then —
and St Paul believed it did — it cannot represent any-
thing else now. Joseph of Arimathea begged the
body of his Lord, but he did not ask for the cross
which was undoubtedly burnt up, for by the Jewish
law, the wood on which one was hanged was burned to
ashes as a thing accursed. The story of the discovery
of the true cross by the Empress Helena, in 327, is a
fable, which has been disproved.
The cross represents a dead Christ, a buried Christ.
It does not represent Christ's triumph, for that was
accomplished at the Resurrection, and as the late
Bishop of Exeter (Dr. Philpotts, a High Churchman)
said, instead of exciting the mind to the contempla-
tion of the triumphant issue of our Lord's sufferings,
the material cross tends to chain it down to the suffer-
ings themselves. Ours is not a dead Christ but a
living Saviour, who ever liveth to make intercession
for us. Our God is a Spirit, and they who worship
Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth. Give
us the LIVING Saviour and the doctrine of the
cross, and let His enemies keep the material cross and
the crucifix.
The image of the cross is worshipped by the Roman
Catholic Church as an Idol, for it cannot be denied
that they pray to it, sing hymns to it, bow down to it
and kiss it, and so determined are they to continue in
their idolatory, that the Second Commandment is
generally omitted from their books of devotion. The
third is called the second, and the last is divided into
two parts, so as to preserve the original number.
1 3 2 Cross.
This Roman gibbet is now made of gold or diamonds.
On earth our Lord was the son of a poor carpenter.
Did He wear jewels then ? He is now in heaven.
Does he wear diamonds there ? And yet we pray-
that we may be Hke Him ! It is made of flowers
Did our Redeemer bear our sins, our curses, and
did he die for us on a lovely bed of sweet-scented
white roses ? Truly was it said, " In the latter times
some shall depart from the faith."
The I.H.S. is also of Pagan origin. Hislop shows
that it was the sign of Isis, Horus and Seb, whose
worship was introduced into Pagan Rome, and the
Roman Church adopted it as they did the cross.
They translated it Jesus Hominum Salvator (Jesus,
Saviour of Men), and when at a later period the
Jesuits took it as their particular device, they con-
sidered the letters as Greek (the Latin H being the
Greek E long), and interpreted it as an abbreviation
of Ies ous (lesous) the Greek for Jesus.
Moreover the X P {cJii rJio) is also Pagan. In Greek
the X (called chi) is equivalent in Latin and English
to C H, and the P (called rho) to our R. The X P
{chi rho) was the monogram of Chronos or Saturn,
who was only another aspect of Tammuz, and was
taken over by the Church to serve for C H R istos
(Christos) or Christ ; and it has been supposed that
when Constantine adopted this symbol, .-.U. 312, for
his banner, he intended it to serve both for Pagans as
Chronos, and for Christians as Christos ; and when
we j-eflect that the Emperor postponed his baptism
until he was on his death-bed it is not very uncharit-
able to presume that he sometimes "faced both ways."
This labarum or banner has been discovered on a coin
of Alexander Bala, King of Syria, B.C. 146, and
also on one of Hippostratus, King of Bactria, B.C. 130.
The X P was also a monogram of Jupiter Amnion
Cross. 133
and of Osiris, who ^^'ere only other forms of ^ammuz.
Bacchus was the same as Oannes, the Man-fish
worshipped by the Phihstines as the Fish On (Dag
On) and also adored in Egypt at his city called On
(the Sun), in Hebrew Bethshemesh (the House of
Shemesh, or Tammuz) and in Greek Heliopolis (the
city of the Sun). Hesychius says that Bacchus was
sometimes called Bacchus Ichthus, Bacchus the Fish,
and Jerome moreover calls him Piscein rnceroris, the
Fish of Sorrow, i.e., the Lamented Fish !
Fish in Greek is I-di-tJi-u-s (Icht/ms),^ and some
of the early Christians do not appear to have under-
stood the Second Commandment for they adopted the
Fish as a symbol and treating the word as an acrostic
read it lesoiis CHristos THeou Uios Soter, i.e., Jesus
Christ God's Son Saviour. The image of the fish
may be seen in the Catacombs, but it fortunately fell
into disuse.
All heathen mythology arose in Babylon, in a great
measure probably from corrupted traditions and was
carried to all parts of the world by the dispersion of
races, proving most unmistakably the truth of the
Bible narrative. The Babylonians believed in a Pagan
triad and to symbolize that doctrine, as Layard's dis-
coveries proved, they employed the equilateral triangle
just as the Romish Church does to this day. (See
Triangle.)
If you place the image of the cross in your churches,
is it not with the intent that it shall be considered a
religious emblem, and if not adored, be looked upon
at least with a certain kind of respect ? If you doubt
their regard of it, propose its removal and see how few
will dare to second you — and yet the good King
Hezekiah destroyed the brazen serpent.
If you wear it as an ornament or place it in your
*ch in Greek is one letter only, and it is the same with th.
1 34 Cross.
houses, although, as you say, it is a trifle (which it is
not), do you not thereby accustom weak Protestants
to the sight and put a stumhHng block in your
brother's way, and are you not imitating those who
worship the same emblem, and therefore confirming
them in idolatry ?
Not only do you uphold the Romanists in their sin,
but you are giving offence to the Jeivs ! We are
expressly told, " Give no occasion of stumbling, neither
to Jeivs, nor to Gentiles, nor to the Church of God."
and the image is an offence to the Jews who, since
the fall of Babylon, have constantly rejected all
idolatrous worship. So strictly do they obey the
Second Commandment that if a Jew passes by a wood
consecrated to idols, or before a statue, he is not
allowed to stoop down, even to extract a thorn that
may have wounded his foot for fear that it should be
thought he was bowing to an idol.
It is not only an offence to those of whom the Lord
hath said, " He that toucheth you toucheththe apple
of his eye," and of whom David said, " They shall
prosper that love thee," but it is an offence also to
those little ones who believe in Him, and' it were better
for that offender " that a millstone were hanged about
his neck and he were drowned in the depth of the
sea.
"If your cross is 'only a symbol,' " as Pastor J.
Nogaret, of Bayonne, says, " how is the image which
is adored to be distinguished from that which is not,
and if the two crosses are placed upon different build-
ings, which one shall be spared in that day when all
the idols shall fall from their places } "
" If, on passing your church, surmounted by the
icon, the worshipper thereof says, " Blessed is the
wood by which salvation cometh," or, " Hail, O cross,
our only hope " {O crux ! ave spes vnica, etc.), or from
Cross. 1 3 5
Hymns Ancient and Modern, " Faithful cross, above
all other " ; which is the most guilty, he whom you
deem an idolator, or you who offer him the idol ?
"Woe unto him that saith to the wood, awake; to the
dumb stone, arise ; it shall teach."
There are some who say that our Lord consecrated
the cross by dying upon it. His death occurred in the
year 33, but twenty -five years later it was not yet con-
secrated, for in the year 58 Paul called it the emblem of
the curse. Whosoever therefore pretends that it has
been consecrated must consider himself wiser than
St. Paul.
Our Saviour gave us three symbols, and only three
— water in baptism, bread and wine, — which are not
images or likenesses of anything in heaven above or
earth beneath. If you add to these blessed emblems
is it not saying that they are insufficient, and therefore
that His work is incomplete ?
Our Lord Jesus Christ said, " I will pray the Father
and He will give you another Comforter, that he may
abide with you for ever." Was not that promise per-
formed ? Is not that Holy Spirit enough, but must
you have a visible, tangible similitude also } It is a
fearful thing to sin against the Holy Ghost. I dare
not say that you are guilty of it, but should you not
" Abstain from all appearance of evil."
" Take ye good heed to yourselves, lest ye corrupt
yourselves, and make you a graven image, the siiiiili-
tude of any fignrer Such were the words of Moses,
the man of God, and they were re-echoed by the
blessed Apostles — " Little children keep yourselves
from images " (Tyndale and Cranmer). Read Deut. iv.
Five times in that one chapter does Moses warn us
against similitudes.
Fathers and mothers, do you really believe in the
Ten Commandments ? If you do, and will still con-
136 Cross.
tinue to risk the loss of your own souls, think at least
of your children. " For I, the Lord thy God, ani a
jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon
the cJnldren, unto the third and fourth generation of
them that hate me," — unto the third and fourtJi genera-
tion. The judgment is a fearful one, but murmur not
— " Shall the thing formed say to him that made it,
why hast thou made me thus ? " And oh, deprive
not those dear ones of that blessing — " mercy unto
thousands of them that love me and keep my com-
mandments."
As Dean McNeile said, " In Holy Scripture the
cross is used literally and metaphorically. Literally
it means the instrument of capital punishment used
by the Romans. Metaphorically it means the doc-
trine of atonement for sin made by the death upon it
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Literally it
signifies the most ignominious of gibbets. Metaphor-
ically it signifies the most glorious of truths ; but un-
fortunately superstitious Christians (so called) identi-
f}ing the literal with the metaphorical, the gibbet with
the doctrine, have elevated the material figure into the
place of the spiritual truth, and enlarge on what they
call the glorious, the holy cross."
"When St. Paul wrote about the cross, the distinction
was clear. His language about the gibbet was that it
was worse than ordinary death, even the death of the
cross, that vilest of vile things. Humiliation could
go no lower. His language about the doctrine was
" God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of
our Lord Jesus Christ, by WHOM the world is crucified
unto me, and I unto the world." (By WHOM, not by
luhich.)
" Had the cross continued in use as the instrument
for the capital punishment of the vilest criminals, it is
difficult to conceive how it could ever have become
Cross. 1 37
an idolized Christian ornament. Had it continued in
use as a Roman gibbet, all its associations would have
been with the enemies and murderers of Christ, but
not with Christ Himself. But, when its use as a
gibbet was abolished, and criminals were executed
in some other way, then all its horrors gradually faded
from men's memories and the hateful thiiig itself
would have been utterly forgotten, and become as
completely an unknown thing as any other special
custom of Imperial Rome, but for the fact that the
Lord Jesus of Nazareth had suffered on it. This res-
cued it from oblivion. And thus, losing its original
associations of horror and degradation, it became
associated with the memory of HiM, and the affection
felt for Him, and the veneration paid to HiM, until
the original distinction between the cross and the doc-
trine of the cross was lost sight of; and the instru-
ment itself, instead of being, as at first, contrasted in
its ignominy with the condescending love of Christ,
who died upon it, was magnified in remembrance of
Him ; and in process of time, and through the idola-
trous cravings of human nature, the figure of it was
reproduced, of all sizes and of all materials, and set
up as an object of worship."
" As the doctrine of the cross was more and more
corrupted, the figure of the cross was more and more
idolized until the language of Scripture, which con-
nects a curse with it, was utterly rejected and contra-
dicted, and the accursed tree was addressed as the
Holy Cross. And now, so egregious is the confusion,
that the language of St. Paul, glorying in the doctrine
is quoted in defence of the worship of the image."
To the Dean's words let us add that it is a question
how far metaphor can be depended upon in these
cross-worshipping days, for many of the young, the
ignorant or the careless cannot, or do not, and others
138 Cross.
will not understand the cross metaphorically. The
latter was the case at Oxford lately (1887) when a
Canon mutilated Holy Writ, by giving as his text
" God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of
the Lord," thus deliberately omitting the explana-
tory part of the verse
At the Reformation both the image and the sign
were abolished everywhere, except only by some
strange oversight, in the Baptismal service. The
Puritans, or original Low Churchmen always objected
to this, and in the time of Elizabeth it was but by a
single vote that it was retained. In the Convocation
of 1563, a petition was presented to the Lower House
that Baptism should be performed without signing the
cross, and it was rejected by one vote only — 59 to 58
— all clergy.
Forty years later it was deemed necessary to explain
" the lawful use of the cross in Baptism "' in the
Canons of 1603, and a weaker or feebler defence could
hardly have been made, for it is stated that " the
honour and dignity of the name of the Cross begat a
reverend estimation even in the Apostles' times ( for
atigJu that IS known to tJie contrary) of the sign of the
cross which the Christians shortly after used in all
their actions."
Paul, however, who glorified in the doctrine only,
called the material cross the emblem of the curse
(there was no reverence for the accursed tree there!)
and Minutius Felix, the Christian rhetorician (A.D.
220), in his defence of Christianity entitled Octavus,
says, " Crosses we (Christians) neither worship nor
wish for. You (Heathen), who consecrate wooden
gods, worship wooden crosses, perhaps as part of your
gods ; for your very standards as well as your banners
and ensigns of your camp, what are they but crosses
gilt and decked?" Which now are we to believe —
Cross. 1 39
the Men of the Time, or the " Canoneers " of 1603 ?
It was only after the time of M, FeHx that the X
{tait) or pagan cross of Tammuz was introduced into
the Christian Church.
At the attempted Revision, in 1689, the Commis-
sion, consisting of ten bishops and twenty divines,
proposed that " If any minister at his institution
shall declare to his bishop, that he cannot satisfy
his conscience in baptizing any with the sign of the
cross, then the bishop shall dispense with him in that
particular, and shall name a curate who shall baptize
the children of those in that parish who desire it may
be done with the sign of the cross." In 1789, the
American Church added a Rubric in their P. B., per-
mitting the sign of the cross to be omitted if desired,
and the R. E. Churches of England, the U. S., and
Canada, and the English P. B. Revision Society, have
left out all notice of the sign in their Prayer Books.
Haifa century ago the cross had not been adopted
in the United States, for Staunton in his Church
Dictio7iary, New York, 1 849, says, ''In ancient times (the
italics are ours) the figure of a cross made of wood or
stone, was in common use as a Church ornament, etc.,
being frequently placed on steeples, towers, pinnacles,
and the summit of arches and roofs ; besides being
interwoven with all the curious and beautiful forms of
Gothic ornament in the interior of churches and sacred
places."
The Rev. Mr. Brailsford, in his Letter to the
Archbishop of Canterbury (London, 1873), shows
when the cross was first introduced into the English
Church of the Reformation. He says : " This move-
ment in the direction of error and idolatry in the Eng-
lish Church may be traced to about 40 years ago, when
a plain cross was put on the covers of books of devo-
tion, as an ornament," It was about this time also
1 40 C^'OSS.
that they commenced introduchig crosses into the
churches and cemeteries. Bishop Maltby (Durham)
foresaw what was coming, for in his charge in 1841,
he says : " We are threatened with a revival of the
folhes of a bygone superstition. A suspicious predi-
lection has been manifested for the emblem of the
cross " ; and soon after Dr. Pusey's advice to his fol-
lowers appeared in the " British Critic " for Jan. 1842.
" As a general rule to disguise the cross with such
conventional shapes and such decorations as render it
a mere ornament to the careless and unfriendly
observer, but a cross still to him that so regards it,"
and gradually at first the roofs of churches began to
bristle all over with crosses of stone or of iron, some-
times surrounded with the circle of the sun, for Tam-
muz, with whom the cross originated, was the Sun-
god ; or combined with the so-called St. Andrew's
cross, a fable of the middle ages, for St. Andrew is
said to have been crucified in Greece, and in the Greek
Menologies, and one or two western Martyrologies, he
is depicted as crucified on a cross of the ordinary
form ; or with trefoils or shamrocks, which were em-
blems of pagan triads tens of centuries before the
time of St. Patrick ; and lilies, the R. C. emblems of
the Virgin, and anciently of Juno and Isis.
Symbols for the use of religion are now often boldly
called " Aids to Devotion," but v\'ill an image of the
accursed tree, or a painted doll, aid us in worshipping
a Holy Spirit who has Himself forbidden their use?
In one chapter of the Old Testament (Deut. iv.)
Mo-ses condemns similitudes no less than five times,
and in the New Testament our most blessed Lord
Himself says : " God is a SPIRIT : and they that wor-
ship Him must worship Him in spirit" — (In SPIRIT,
7iot if I an Evibleni! )
Oh ! for another good king Josiah — " And they
Cross. 1 4 1
brake down the altars of the Baalim in his presence ;
and the SuN-I MAGES, tJiat were on high above them,
he hewed them down." — (ii Chron. xxxiv, 4, Revised
Version.)
In 1842, a church was built at Leeds, England,
founded, it was believed, by Dr. Pusey, and called
Holy Cross Church, but Bishop (afterwards Arch-
bishop) Longley insisted upon the name being changed
from " Holy Cross " to St. Saviour.
In 1884 a cross which had been placed over the so-
called altar of St. Jude's Church, Hardwick Street,
Liverpool, was smashed by some person unknown.
Romanists would have probably cried out for a service
of re-consecration, but the Churchwardens replaced
the Ten Commandments where they had formerly
been before the cross was placed there, discarded the
surpliced choir, and Bishop Ryle sent a sound Evan-
gelical minister who performed the service to crowded
congregations on the following Sunday.
In 1876, the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council in the case of Masters v. Durst., declared that
the cross on the table was illegal, but did not order its
removal because the Churchwardens had already re-
moved it from the church. Since then numbers of
crosses have been placed upon the tables, and Her
Majesty's Judges have not acted upon the ascertained
law of the Church by ordering their removal, for the
simple reason that nobody has hitherto called upon them
to do so. The Bishops, by their arbitrary acts, render
this impossible, yet more than one Consistory Court
Judge has granted a faculty for the removal of such a
cross, or has refused to grant a faculty for a cross so
placed.
If there is any virtue in the sign of the cross the
Greeks must possess it in greater measure. A
Romanist makes one sign aLd deems that sufficient.
1 42 Cross — Crucifix.
whilst a Greek crosses himself on his forehead, both
shoulders and breast. Four times to the Roman
once, and this moreover is done so frequently during
their prayers that it sometimes becomes fatiguing, as
shown by the Greek monk mentioned by About, who
was thankful he had two hands to do it with.
" Not to Thy cross, but to Thyself
My LIVING Saviour would I cling ;
'Twas Thou and not Thy cross didst bear
My soul's dark guilt — sin's deadly sting."
It is difficult now to find a P. B. without little Mal-
tese crosses in the four corners of every page, and this
form of the cross is the one used in R. C. Books of
Devotion to point out where people should cross
themselves, and the R. C. bishops always make the
same before signing their names. Some two score
years ago the Pope sent his first archbishop, named
John Hughes, to New York. He was in the habit of
writing in the papers with this sign to his name,
and the New York //^r<^/<^ nicknamed him Cross John
Hughes.
The cross generally called Maltese was proba-
bly the oldest form of that symbol. George Smith
says " At the head of the Babylonian mythology
stands a deity who was sometimes identified with the
heavens, sometimes considered as the god and ruler
of heaven. This deity is named Anu, his sign is the
simple star, the symbol of divinity, and at other times
the Maltese cross." (See Taniuiuz.)
CPUCifix. " A figure of the cross, either in statuary
or painting, etc., with a representation of Christ ex-
tended upon it, very commonly used by Roman
Catholics in their private devotion, and conspicuously
placed in their churches to excite (as they allege) re-
ligious feeling, and aid in fixing their thoughts on the
Crucifix. 143
sufferings and death of the Redeemer. The super-
stitious notions, and ' peril of idolatry,' which have
long attended the crucifix, have led to its banishment
from all Protestant Churches."
The above is copied verbatim from Staunton's
C/ucrch Dictionary, New ^ork 1849, as being the defi-
nition of a High Church clergyman half a century
ago.
Among all the Christian inscriptions in the Roman
Catacombs there are no crucifixes, no paintings of
Christ on the cross, none of Christ bearing the cross,
nor of the Virgin and Child. Throughout the whole
of the Lapidarian Gallery you cannot find the name
of the Virgin Mary.
The first crucifix painting which ever existed is be-
lieved to have been made in France about the middle
c( the sixth century, although it is claimed that there
was one at Mount Athos of a century older, and
another at Liege in the fourth century. They soon
became common both in paintings and images, the
latter sometimes having movable limbs set in motion
by strings.
Do those who are fond of crucifixes never reflect
that our Lord was stripped naked by the soldiers in
scorn and contempt, and that they are following that
example, and moreover that our Lord will appear the
second time clothed with a garment down to the foot.
(Rev. i, 13)? They sing from Hymns A. and M. and
the Hymnal Companion, " Those dear tokens of His
passion, still His dazzling body bears," or from the
latter, (No. 171, second edition) : "For ever here my
rest 'shall be, close to Thy bleeding side." (No.
233) : " O joy all joys beyond, to see the Lamb who
died, and count each sacred wound, in hands and feet
and side." (No. 146): " Thy Saviour stands; shows
his wounds."
144 Dark Ages — Dedication Festivals.
Is not this fearful ? Once, on earth, our Lord con-
descended to allay the doubts of Thomas, but He said
then, "Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have
believed." What does Bishop Bickersteth, the editor,
intend to teach ? Is it that the Lord Jesus will sJiozv
his 7i'ounds in heaven to prove, or more fearful still,
to boast of what He has done for us, or that we, men
and women both, shall strip off His robe to see His
naked side ? And does the editor believe that the
wounds of our Perfect God are still bleeding? Our
most blessed Lord is ever interceding for us with a
most merciful Father, but is He also ever reminding
that Father, or us, of His sufferings, wiiich a truly
penitent sinner can never forget. (See Cross and
Rood Screens.)
Dark Ag'es. Sometimes called the Middle Ages.
According to Hallam, this period, during which learn-
ing was at a very low ebb, comprised about lOOO
years — from the invasion of France by Clovis in 486,
to that of Naples by Charles VIII. in 1495.
Dating" Letters from Festivals. The late Lord
Plunkett, bishop of Tuam (uncle to the present Arch-
bishop of Dublin), received a letter from his neighbor
the R. C. Archbishop of Tuam, dated on the " Feast
of St. Jarlath." Lord P. replied on the ist of July,
and dated his letter "Anniversary of the Battle of the
Boyne."
Dedication Festivals. Like many other Church
(not necessarily Christian) ceremonies, these only tend
to the Elevation of the Priesthood, by leading the
innocent laity to believe that nothing can be done with-
out the intervention of the so-called " priest." This hav-
ing a separate ceremony for every passing incident is
Chukciiianitv not Christianity.
Desk. 145
Desk. Archbishop Grindall's Injunctions were "a
decent low pulpit in the body of the Church, wherein
the minister shall stand ivith his face towards the
people when he readeth Morning and Evening Prayer ;
provided always, that when the churches are very
small it shall suffice that the minister shall stand in
his accustomed stall in the choir, so that a convenient
desk or lectern" ivith room to turn his face towards
tJie people be there provided. Proving evidently that
it was intended to prevent the awkward custom of
reading prayers towards the opposite side ot the
chancel, and the still more objectionable Romish
custom of reading them with the back toward the
people.
Sideward desks were brought into general use by
the Puseyites who declared openly that when the
people had become sufficiently accustomed to seeing
the minister's side they would be ready for the next
step and not object to his back being turned towards
them. They gave as a reason that when the clergy-
man was reading the Bible he faced the people, and
therefore when he was praying to GOD he should
change his position — as if the Almighty was not
Omnipresent!
Bishop Christopher Wordsworth said *' In whatever
direction the priest (presbyter) may turn his eye .
. . he can plead with GOD, by reason of the Divine
Omnipresence ; but because man is finite, he cannot
plead with man unless he turns his eyes towards them.
Does an orator turn his face away from those to whom
he appeals ? "
Not many years ago the desks or low pulpits
were wide enough to hold the Bible and P. B.
side by side. Procter says that about 1549 some
*Desk or lectern. Not both.
10
1^6 Desk.
bishops caused a seat to be made in the ^reat churches
where the minister might sit or stand during the whole
of the Divine Service, and we remember seeing a pul-
pit made of this pattern. The centre was slightly
raised and the minister on rising had his preaching-
desk before him and the Bible and P. B. on either
side.
The clergy were not then so fond of marching about
nor anxious to get inside the rails distinguishing them
from the crowd, i.e., the laity. Preachers would some-
times take their seats in the pulpits, in their gowns, at
the commencement of the service which was then
generally differently conducted for when there were
two one would perform the service and the other
preach. Years ago we occasionally saw preachers,
sometimes in their gowns and sometimes in their ordi-
nary dress, take their seats in the Incumbent's family
pew and remain there until it was time to go into the
pulpit, or into the vestry to put on their gowns.
The chancels then, when they had them, were not
so deep as at present, as the organ and choir were in
their proper place in the west gallery, over the main
entrance, where there was no place for the display of
a surpliced choir nor for a procession.
But now the service is often conducted as follows,
or at least was until the last very few years when they
commenced to shorten the morning prayer by reading
the Litany and Anti-communion Service on alternate
Sundays.
It must first be remembered that churches are
always considered to be facing the east like the old
Pagan temples. Even if the church stands north and
south that north is considered to be east.
The minister or ministers commence :—
. I. At the desk facing the people or the west.
2. He then turns to a sideward desk, with his side
Desk. 147
to the people and prays facing the north, or to the
side wall and half the choir.
3. At the Creed he turns again, with his back to
the congregation and adores the sun in the east as his
Pagan ancestors did before him.
4. He then goes, in a procession of one, to the gaudy
brass lectern and reads the bible and marches back
again.
5. He then proceeds to the faldstool,* reads the
Litany and returns.
6. He then, instead of going to the Lectern, where
he read the Bible previously, marches inside the rails,
and when there are two, he who reads the Gospel
goes to the north end of the Lord's table and the other
to the south, and they kneel and pray facing each
other. Then the " Priest " (presbyter) rehearses the
Commandments ; then they kneel again and pray
facing each other ; then the Bible is read, and finally
they turn again to the east and say the Nicene Creed.
But both the reading and praying are of but little bene-
fit to the congregation, except only those in the front
pews, for those who are in the transepts can neither
see nor hear, and those in the rear can hear but little
of what is said at the end of the long chancel.
Thus, before, the commencement of the sermon, in
about one hour's time, facing the four points of the
compass more than twice, marching and counter-
marching, ceremony upon ceremony, in the worship
of an Almighty GOD who is a Spirit and whom it is
blasphemy to attempt to localize. Is this the simpli-
city of the Gospel } Is it Christianity or Churchianity?
(See East at the recital of tJie Creed.)
*A piece of furniture not even mentioned by Staunton in 1849, a
work from which Dean Hook derived the title of his own book as he
says in the Preface.
I4S Dissenters.
Dissenters. 1 here are no dissenters in the British
Dominions and in the U.S.A., except only in England
and Scotland where there are established churches to
dissent front.
Although in North Britain where the Presbyterian
is the established church, and we are dissenters, our
church being only tolerated there, we of South Bri-
tain, and its branches, call ourselves the Lord's house
{kuriake in Greek) and consider the rest of the
Protestant world outside barbarians, to use the term
the Chinese apply to us, but it cannot be denied that
our Scotch brethren have preserved the name while
we have corrupted it ! K^irtake and kirk are almost
identical, but we have changed it to church.
Even in England our church is only established by
the laws of the realm, and elsewhere not excepting
the sister kingdom of Ireland, as a branch of the
Universal Church, we ourselves are one of the sects or
denominations, and it is worse than folly for Pro-
testant Episcopalians to speak in our self-righteous-
ness with such lofty disdain of members of other
Evangelical churches while many of the latter are in
every respect our equals, not only as Christian men,
but also as scholars and gentlemen, and the ministra-
tion of whose godly ministers have been as blessed,
and whose orders and sacraments are as valid as our
own.
We regret to observe that our brethren in the
U. S. A. are beginning to call themselves The Church,
as if they are the only Lord's House. Have they
had a special revelation to that effect or have they
been established by the Laws of the Land ? There,
are too many of us already who boast that we are not
as other men are, and this will only serve to make the
matter worse.
Until the time of Charles the second, Protestant
Dissenters — Dove. 149
ministers of other countries could hold livings in our
church. (See Priest^
Dove. The Holy Spirit did not appear in t\\Q form
of a dove as many erroneously believe. *' Like " as
Canon Eden says, "being by such interpreters mis-
taken for an adjective {omoion), whereas it is a con-
junction, as if {p sei). The words necessarily mean
no more than that the Holy Spirit came upon Christ
with a downward motion similar to that which a dove
would make."
Our Reformers carefully guarded against this con-
fusion and in the Declaration appointed in 1559, to be
read by all parsons, vicars and curates, is the follow-
ing : 'T do utterly disallow .... all kinds of
expressing GOD invisible in the form of an old man
(Ancient of Days), the Holy Ghost in the form of a
dove and all other vain worshipping of GOD."
In the Revised Version the word "as" is used
instead of " like." He descended as a dove would
descend. Luke does not say what the bodily shape
was but may it not have been that of an angel ?
Let those who blasphemously compare the Holy
Spirit with a pigeon bear this in mind. In Bishop
Bickersteth's new Hymnal the Holy Dove is mentioned
in no less than ten hymns, four of which were written
by the bishop himself No. 262, " Holy Spirit,
heavenly Dove. (379) " For still the Dove is hover-
ing," (278) " Broods o'er us Thy hovering Dove/' (261)
" He came in semblance of a Dove," and most horri-
ble of all, making the Holy Spirit unmistakably a
pigeon zvitk feathers, (253) "Soft as the plumes of
Jesus' Dove."
We derived the symbol from the Roman Church.
They undoubtedly received ii from pagan Rome, but
blasphemously applied it to the Holy Spirit. The
150 East at the Recital of the Creed.
dove was sacred to Venus and Juno whose name was
D' June, or the Dove, or without the article Juno.
East at the recital of the Creed. We derived this
turnine^ to the east from the Roman Church,
but even there it was condemned by a Pope in
the fifth century ! Pope Leo the Great who died in
461, says that to his great sorrow the rising sun was
worshipped from the hills by some of the weaker sort,
and that some Christians, when they come to the
Church of St. Peter, partly through ignorance and
partly through a spirit of Paganism, turn themselves
back (that is round) towards the rising sun, and bow
down their heads. This proves that the St. Peter's
Church of that day was not oriented.
One would almost suppose the Pope was quoting
Ezekiel " about five and twenty men, with their backs
toward the temple of the Lord and their faces toward
the east : and they worshipped the sun towards the
east."
The Israelites were forbidden in Deuteronomy to
worship the sun and moon under pain of death by
stoning.
In Staunton's ChurcJi Dictionary, New York, 1849,
there is no mention whatever of the East or Eastward
Position, showing pretty evidently that there was no
turning to the east in the American Church forty
years ago.
In D'Oyley and Mant's Notes to the Holy Bible,
London, 1848. (Printed for the S. P. C. K.) the
" turn thee yet again " is defined as " a description of
the Persian superstition."
We are told in Smith and Cheetham's Dictionary of
Christian Antiquities that praying to the East, as the
quarter of the rising sun, was adopted from its com-
mencement " in accordance with the very wise rule
East at the Recital of the Creed. 1 5 r
which accepted all that was good and pure in the
rehgious system it came to supplant." If praying
thus was " good and pure," Ezekiel must have been
mistaken when he tells us it was pointed out to him
as an abomination. Whom then must we believe —
the Spirit who spoke to Ezekiel, or Messrs. Smith
and Cheetham ? It was worshipping the sun in the
east, and in another part of the work, which is not
free from contradictions, Drs. Smith and Cheetham
allow that it was probably in the first instance derived
from Persian notions of sun-worship. Instead of
Persia, however, they should have gone to the foun-
tain-head — Babylon. Those who pray toward the
east must believe that their god is localized in one
particular corner of the heavens, as if there is a corner
there, and their god then differs from our Omnipresent
God, who is present to all and present everywhere.
The custom arose before the discovery that our
earth is a sphere revolving through space and there-
fore when we in America are facing the east, those
who are on the opposite side of the globe who are
facing the same way as ourselves are looking toward
the west. Are not those who turn to the east, praying
toward that spot when the N. A. Indians believe the
Great Hare dwells — "the edge of the earth where
the sun rises ?"
"And they worshipped the sun toward the east .
. . . and, lo, they put the branch to their nose."
Ez. viii. 17.
Why do not our Anglican sun-worshippers also put
the branch to their nose? When did they or rather
their predecessors abandon this part of their worship.'*
Their fellow-worshippers, the Parsee priests in India,
still use the branch although they would probably
find it difficult to explain its origin. This branch
used in lieu of a divining rod is the barsoni or branch
152 East at tJie Recital of the Creea.
of the tamarisk tree which was considered holy from
having overshadowed the coffin of Osiris, who was
the same as Tammuz, who was the same as Adonis,
or to come nearer home as Diarmad in Scotland. The
coffin when driven ashore by the waves on the coast
of Byblus, lodged in the branches of one of these
trees where it was discovered by I sis.
Wilfully ignoring the true source, many reasons
fanciful and even puerile have been given for turning
to the east, amongst these being that Christ made his
first appearance in the east. He was not born in the
east however, but only in the east of the wise men
who saw His star in their east. Bethlehem is to the
east of one quarter of the earth only. Another reason
is that the Jews always turned to Jerusalem when
they prayed ; but the Jews living east of Jerusalem
must have turned to the west."^ Another, that the
east was the most honourable part of creation. How
can this be proved ? Wheatly says that " it is proba-
ble from the Scripture that the Majesty and Glory of
God is in a peculiar manner in that part of the
Heavens " — but of these and some others the most
absurd is that of the Ecclesiologists in 1850, "Adam
is reported by an ancient author to have looked to the
east when he said his prayers !"
Canon Mozley in his " Reminiscences" referring to
a trip of Newman (afterwards Cardinal) and Froude
in the Mediterranean in 1832, says: "The yacht was
their Church. They kept up their devotions like
good Church of England men. All kept their eyes
on the compass, as it lay on the cabin table, to be sure
that they addressed their prayers toward the east, that
is to Jerusalem and not to Rome."
Could madness go further. Had they been in the
*With them there was a cause, for it probably arose in the time of
the first temple when the Schekinah rested there.
East at the Recital of the Creed. 153
Persian Gulf, on the other side of Jerusalem, would
they then have prayed to the east ? In the Levant
we have often seen Turks and Arabs go to the man
at the wheel and by signs, or perhaps the word
" Mecca," ask their proper direction, when they would
kneel down on the deck and pray, and we often
wondered that they trusted to a common sailor whom
they considered an infidel, without fearing that he
might give them the wrong quarter so that their
prayers would be wasted ! They were poor Moham-
medans — Newman and Froude educated Englishmen
— but all seem to have believed, not in an Omnipre-
sent God, but in great Idols propped up, one at Mecca
and the other in one quarter of Heaven, — as if tJiere
was a North and South, East and West in Heaven !
On earth east and west are relative to the earth's
position. What are they relative to in Heaven ?
It was a superstition of the early Church not only
that the Almighty dwelt in the East, but also that
Satan dwelt in the West ! Even in the Apostolic age,
as St. Paul tells us, the mystery of iniquity was
already at work, and not long after that day it was
the custom in baptism to turn to the West and re-
nounce the devil. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, in the
latter part of the fourth century, addressing the
Neophytes says, " standing with your faces to the
West you were bidden to stretch forth the hand with
a gesture of repulsion and ye renounced Satan as
though he were present before you then
turning towards the sun-rising, the place of light,
thou wert told to say, ' I believe in GOD the Father,
and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and in one baptism
of repentance.' "
Can any one doubt for a moment that this turning
to the east was a relic of sun-worship }
To attempt to localize Satan is — shall we say lunacy
1 54 East at tJic Recital of IJie Creed — Easter.
— but to attempt to localize the Almighty, who is a
Spirit, is most horrible blasphemy.
In the Greek Church of Russia at the present day
in the order of Baptism when the priest asks " Dost
thou renounce" etc., and the sponsors answer " I have
renounced him," the priest then says, '' TJie7i bloiv and
spit upon Jiiinl' setting the example by blowing gently
and making the gesture of spitting at the unseen
enemy.
We have given up spitting at the devil in the west.
Is it not time that we also give up the rest of this
superstitious ceremony ? (See Desk, Eastward Posi-
tion and Orientalism.)
Easter. In Smith and Cheetham's Dictionary
(Toronto Edition, 1876), we read "The Teutonic
name of the feast of our Lord's Resurrection (A. S.
easier, Germ, ostern)," and a quotation from Bede
showing the name was derived from a goddess called
Eostre whose month was called Easter month.
They might have said more, instead of wasting four-
teen columns on the disputes which convulsed the
Church about the proper time for observing Easter,
for Easter is the same as Astarte, and Sanchoniathon,
who lived before the Trojan war, said that '' Astarte is
Aphrodite," and Aphrodite is the Greek name for
Venus. Fifteen centuries later, about A.D. 140, the
Greek Historian Appian says Astarte was '' by some
called Juno, and by others Venus ; " and Layard dis-
covered the name of Istar in Nineveh a quarter of a
century before this Dictionary was first published.
Canon Blakeny in his Handbook of the Liturgy,
published only five or six years ago, says merely
*' Easter, from Eostre, spring ; also called Pasch — the
original title — is derived from Apostolic times." On the
contrary, however, as correctly stated in the Diction-
Easter. 1 5 5
ary, " There is no evidence in the N. T. that Easter
existed at first as an institution." Neither does it ap-
pear to have been observed until at least half a cen-
tury after the death of the last of the Apostles. The
early Church consecrated every Sunday to the memory
of the Resurrection.
Canon Blakeny moreover makes no mention what-
ever of the heathen o^oddess ! Was he afraid to let
the truth be known P"^
And only last year Canon Eden in his Churchma-n! s
TJieological Dictionary, gives like Robertson (see
Preface) as his first definition that it was derived from
a Saxon word signifying " to rise ! " Why this appa-
rent concealment when Bede, who lived about a cen-
tury after the time of Augustine, tells us decidedly
that it was derived from the Pagan goddess ?
At the Council of Nice, in 325, it was decided that
all Churches should keep the Pasch, or Feast of Easter
as we call it, on one and the same day, and that not
on the day of the Jewish Passover, but upon the Sun-
day following, but the disputes were not finally settled
until the year 525, when the Roman Church adopted
the Alexandrian calculation.
In England the dispute between the Old British
*'l'he Canon does not tell us what the Commination discipline was,
nor that the Ember Days were fasts of the Dark Ages. He gives us a
list of the Holy Days and adds, " Here is no day of doubtful import."
He acknowledges that Christmas was only established in the fourth
century, but adds, " Its propriety cannot be questioned." It was only
established however about A. D. 380, and was not acknowledged by the
Primitive Church. He tells us the Benedicite is taken from the 3rd
chap, of Daniel, but does not add that it is a part of the Greek addition
to that chapter and is not found in the original text. He says the Dio-
cletian persecution extended to Britain when Eusebius who was living
at the time says the contrary. But most strange, he refers to the New
Lectionary but does not inform us that in 187 1 the commissioners left
out the chapter in Revelation referring especially to the Church of
Rome, and the 13th chapter containing the wonderful number of the
beast.
156 Easter.
Church and Augustine's Roman Church was settled in
the time o{ Oswy, King of Northumbria, A.D. 664, at
the Council of Whitby, when, as Dr. Short, Bishop of
St. Asaph, tells us (without any comment) " Oswy
decided in favor of the Roman Church, because both
parties agreed that St. Peter kept the keys of heaven,
and that he had used the Roman method of computing^'
and we, the Protestant Church of England, are follow-
ing King Oswy's ruling still — because St. Peter keeps
the keys of heaven ! ! !
And what do our Tables to find Easter signify?
TJiey do not shozu the date of the Resurrection, which
is unknown, and are not all those calculations there-
fore useless ? The R. E. Churches of England and
this continent have merely expunged these Tables
and also the Tables of Fasts and Feasts without giv-
ing any reasons.
The word " Easter " in Acts xii, 4, is an error, for it
was not then (A.D. 44) observed. It is correctly ren-
dered Passover in the Revised Version. The Passover
was not preceded by a lent.
Tertullian (ob. 225) asks why in the face of St.
Pauls language as to times and seasons Pasch is cele-
brated, and why the periods from thence to Whit Sun-
day are spent as one long season of rejoicing, and
Socrates, the church historian of the 5th century says
of this feast " on which the rest depend," " The Saviour
and His Apostles have enjoined us by no law to keep
this feast. . . . TJie apostles had no thought oj
appointing festival days, but of promoting a life of
blamelessness and piety. And it appears to me that
this feast has been introduced into the Church from
some old usage, just as many other customs have been
established."
The exact date of the Resurrection is we repeat
unknown. All that is certain is that it occurred on
Easter. 1 5 7
the First Day of the week. Among numerous auth-
orities Smith's Bible Dictionary gives Friday, April
7th, A.D. 29, as the day of the Passion and Sunday,
April 9th as that of the Resurrection, while Dr. Grat-
tan Guinness concludes the dates were March i8th
and 2 1st of the same year.
We celebrate the Nativity on a fixed day, the 25Lh
of December, and if, contrary to Tertullian and
Socrates, we should also celebrate the Resurrection,
why should it not be on a fixed day likewise ?
Easter, who was called by the Old and Anglo
Saxons Ostara, Foster, Fostur, Fostre and Easter,
was the same as the Istar of Nineveh, the Astarte of
Syria or the Syrian Venus and the Astaroth or Ash-
toreth of the Bible. She was the Moon-goddess, and
one of her titles, by which the Jewish women worship-
ped her was Queen of Heaven (J ere. vii. 18, xliv. 17).
As Juno she sometimes appeared as the German
goddess Hertha or Earth, and must therefore have
been the same as the Roman goddess Ops or Tellus,
i. e. Earth, whose festival as the Bona Dea or Good
goddess was celebrated on the ist of May.
The festival of Flora, the goddess of flowers, was
also celebrated at this time for five days from the
28th of April to the 2nd of May, whence our May
day anniversary. No bloody sacrifices were allowed
to be offered, but only pure lire, floivers and incense.
Whence the candles, flowers and incense in the Roman,
and also in some of our own churches at Faster.
At the Passover candles were used for giving light
only, not for ceremonial purposes, and there was
neither flowers nor incense.
Isis was the same as Juno, and the latter, as we
have shown was the same as Venus. The lily was
sacred both to Lsis and Juno and must therefore have
been also sacred to Venus. When Isis was introduced
158 Easter— Easter Egg.
into the Christian Church as the Virgin Mary, the Hly
was retained and is sacred to the Virgin in the R. C.
Church to this day. We (some of us at least) retain it
in honor of Venus and decorate our churches on her
(Easter) day with the hHes of Venus or Astarte.
The month of May is still sacred with the Roman-
ists to the Blessed Virgin, who usurped the places of
the Pagan deities. On the first of May, bonfires still
besin to blaze at sunset from the mountain sides of
Italy. Such was also formerly the case in Germany
(called Osterfeiirn), Scandinavia and elsewhere, and
they were undoubtedly made to the same goddess under
different names. As we have shown they were made
in Scotland to Beltis, or the Lady.
The Germans are equally guilty with us in calling
the day by the name of the heathen goddess, but the
Dutch, also a Saxon nation, and other countries call
it the Passover. (See Candles, Paganism, Preface s-wd
Ta})iuiuz.)
EasteP Eg'g'. This subject may seem out of place
here, but it is an acknowledged symbol in the Roman
and Greek Churches. It is most undoubtedly of
Pagan origin.
The mystic ^^^ had a twofold signification ;
as the mundane ^'g^ it had reference to the ark
in which the whole human race were shut up as
the chick is enclosed in the ^<gg before it is hatched ;
but in its more general aspect it was the ^g'g out
of which came Venus, who was also called the
Syrian goddess, that is Astarte. Hence the Q.g%
became one of her symbols, and the Druids wore
one set in gold hung about their necks. It was
called in Latin ovum aiiguinum, serpent's Q.gg. Pliny
appears to have believed the fabulous story that it
was made by serpents, and adds, " I have seen that
Raster Egg — Eastern CJiurches. 159
^gg- It is tiie badge of distinction {insigne) which all
the Druids wear." Some of rock crystal, about the
size of a hen's ^^2^ are still preserved in Scotland, and
they are occasionally found there and in Wales, made
generally of glass or vitreous paste, and are called in
Welsh gleini nadroedd, snake or adder stones.
The Hindus have a mystic ^g^ as well as the
Japanese, and the Chinese use dyed or painted eggs
on sacred festivals. The Mahommedans, who con-
demn all idolatry, nevertheless fill their mosques with
ostrich eggs as was anciently done in the Greek and
Egyptian temples, and the Roman and Greek Churches
adopted Astarte's ^g^ and consecrated it as a symbol
of Christ's Resurrection.
Eastern Churches. The Oriental Churches who
renounce the communion of the Greek Church are
the Armenian, the Chaldean or Nestorians, the
Jacobites of Asia, Syria and Africa (which includes
the Copts and Abyssinians) and the Maronites.
The Armenians number, it is said, nearly two mil-
lions, of whom about one-half are under the sway of
Turkey and the remainder are distributed through
Russia, Persia and India. They are Monophysites, so
called because they assert there is but one nature
{monos, single, phusis nature) in Christ, the human
having been absorbed in the divine. They separated
from the Greek Church in the sixth century, and still
hate each other cordially. In the fourteenth century
some of them, who are presided over by an archbishop,
joined the Church of Rome. The Armenian patri-
arch, who is styled Catholicos, and who resides at
Etchmiazan, is chosen by the bishops there assembled
and this election was confirmed by the Shah of Persia
until 1828, when the Czar of Russia became possessor
of Persian Armenia. The patriarch has now jurisdic-
l6o Eastern ChurcJies.
tion only over those members of his church estabHshed
in Russia, Persia and other parts of Asia Minor, Tur-
key excepted. He has under him two lesser patri-
archs whose seats are at Sis in Cincia and Achthamar
in Lake Van. There are two other patriarchs, viz.,
of Constantinople and Jerusalem, who are created by
the Sultan and possess a mere nominal authority.
Layard, in speaking .of one of their bishops, says, " I
found him profoundly ignorant like the rest of his
class."
The Jacobites, who in Egypt are styled Copts, took
their name from Jacob Albardai or Baradoeus, the re-
storer of the sect of the Monophysites, who died in
588. Two of their patriarchs reside in Mesopotamia
and another in Syria, but there are not many of this
sect left.
The vast number of ruined convents and churches
in various parts of Egypt shows, says Lane, that the
Copts were very numerous a few centuries ago, but
many of them have embraced the Mahommedan faith
and they have dwindled down to less than 150,000, of
whom perhaps 10,000 are in Cairo.
They were placed in possession of the Egyptian
Churches by the Saracens in the seventh century.
They are under the jurisdiction of their Batrak or
Patriarch of Alexandria, who occupies the Chair of
St. Mark (!), but who resides in Cairo. He has the
power of appointing the Patriarch of Abysinnia, who
is called Abouna (Lane says "el Matran "), and who
cannot be a native of that country. The Abysinnians
were converted to Christianitv in the time of Constan-
tine.
The Copts have five P^asts. The fast of Nine-
veh, three days. One week later the Great Fast or
Lent, fifty-five days ; the P'^ast of the Apostles, from
Ascension Day to our iith of July; the P^ast of the
Eastern ChurcJies. i6i
Virgin, before the Assumption (Aug. 9), fifteen days ;
and the Fast of the Nativity, before Christmas, twenty-
eight days, and all Wednesdays and Fridays except
during the fifty days following the Great Fast, making
thus, according to the time when Ascension Day falls,
from 228 to 260 Fast Days !
Fortunately for the Abyssianians, however, as we
have pointed out under Lent, their priests, for a pecu-
niary consideration, will fast for the people ? Besides
the Fasts they have seven great Festivals of a day
each and some minor ones.
The Maronites of the Lebanon were so called from
John Maro in the seventh century. They were anci-
ently Monothelites, a sect who held that Christ had
but one will {inonos, alone, single ; thelein, will) in his
two natures, but joined the Roman Church in the
twelfth century. Their priests, however, are allowed
to marry like those of the Greek Church. Their
patriarch claims the title of Patriarch of Antioch and
they number about 200,000 or 250,000 souls.
The Chaldeans are generally called Nestorians,
although they disclaim that designation. Nestorius,
Bishop of Constantinople (428-431) protested against
the Virgin Mary being called the Mother of God, and
to this day the Chaldeans refuse that title to the
Blessed Virgin. He maintained that although the
Virgin Mary was the mother of Jesus Christ, as man,
yet she was not the mother of GoD, since no human
creature could impart to another what she had not
herself.
They are presided over by a patriarch who is
called Katoleeka, and Mosheim says of them " that of
all Christian societies established in the East, they
have preserved themselves the most free from the
numberless superstitions which have found their way
into the Greek and Lat n Churches." There was a
II
l62 Eastern CJiurclics — Eastward Position.
secession from this Church in the fourteenth century
to the Church of Rome, and the rival patriarch appro-
priated the title of Patriarch of the East. We believe
of late years numbers of the Nestorians were induced
to join the Roman Church, but now Protestant
Missionaries are actively at work among them.
Eastward Position. This must be distinguished
from Turning to the East in the Creed, being sacerdotal
in its signification, and was adopted by the Ritualistic
clergy because it is the position of a sacrificing priest.
The so-called *' altar " is his east and it is the position
taken by him when he stands at or before that "altar"
with what he calls the real body of our Lord before
him, and with his back to the people whilst in the act
of what he professes to consider offering up a sacrifice.
He stands thus so that the congregation cannot see
the manual actions, viz., the breaking of the bread and
the pouring out of the wine, in which act they are ex-
pected to believe some mysterious change takes-place ;
but there is no mystery. The bread is not changed
into flesh, neither is the wine changed into blood.
At the First Communion did our Lord break the
bread and pour out the wine at the table before His
Disciples, or did He turn His back upon them and
do it?
As we have shown under " Communion Tables "
and " Transubstantiation," this Eastward Position is
carefully guarded against in some of our own churches
and also in the Free Church of England (who use the
Revised P. B.) the R. E. and the Spanish Churches,
by placing the Table table-wise when the minister
stands with his side to the people, or better still by
removing the table from the wall so that the minister
stards with his back to the wall and his face to the
Elevation — Euiber Days. 163
people. In neither case can there be any concealment
or mystery.
Moreover in these positions the table remains a
Holy Table and cannot be turned into a Sideboard
for the display of illegal ornaments, by the addition of
a reredos.
According to the English Chmclmian at one of the
Liverpool Churches lately when the Eastward Position
was introduced by the Incumbent " some of the parish-
ioners arose from their seats and turned their backs
upon the Incumbent to show their resentment of the
outrage."
The Eastward Position is one of the Six Points of
Ritualism, all of which have been condemned by the
Ecclesiastical Courts. The five others are the Roman
or Mass Vestments, Lights on the so-called " Altar,"
mixed Chalice, the Use of unleavened bread or wafers
and Incense. (See East at the recital of the Creed.)
Elevation of the Cup and Paten. This has been
pronounced illegal in England. The Spanish Church
is very decided upon this point. Their P. B. says,
"And with regard to the error of those, who teach
that Christ gave Himself, or His Body and Blood, to
be elevated, reserved, carried in procession, or adored
under the veil of bread and wine, we absolutely reject
it." (See Procession.)
Ember Days. The Fast of the Four Seasons, in
Latin quatiior tempora, corrupted in Dutch to qiiater-
temper and in German to quatember. Many English
writers, however, give as a definition (even as late as
1890) that it arose from putting embers on the head
in token of humiliation ! They were not instituted
until about the middle of the fourth century as a local
Roman custom ; were never observed by the Eastern
164 Euiher Days.
Church, and were not adopted by the Gallican Church
until about the time of Charlemagne, four centuries
later, and in England probably about the same time.
The Irish Church, when they revised their P. B., re-
tained these days, " In accordance (as they say in their
Canons) with the ancient custom of the Church " —
which means the Roman Church of the Dark
Ages ! ! !
To show our own ignorance, and how little we our-
selves understand our own P. B. — Wheatley, omitting
the above true definition, gives no less than four
etymologies, one of which is sprinkling ashes on the
head or sitting on ashes, and another, eating cakes
baked on embers. Not one of the four is the true
derivation ! The '' ember " seems to have been a
puzzle. Wheatley's last edition is A.D. 1852 ; the
Irish Church Prayer Book, was published in 1878.
Within the last score of years the Reformed Epis-
copal Churches of England, the U. S. A. and Canada,
and the Book of Common Prayer Revised (London,
1874), have eliminated these days.
If we do our duty according to the P. B., the
Church of England throughout the four quarters of
the globe must fast at these seasons, because some
young men or boys may perhaps be ordained dea-
cons or presbyters in some parts of the world. Is
not this Elevation of the Priesthood with a ven-
geance ?
We say boys because although the Church enjoins
none shall be admitted a deacon except he be twenty-
three, the Archbishop of Canterbury can grant a
faculty overriding that law. Like the Pope the Arch-
bishop can also grant dispensations to marry, to eat
flesh on days prohibited, and the like.
In the Roman Church marriages are not permitted
during the fasts. Whether there is any old Law of
spectators at Mass — Evergreens. 165
the same kind in our Church which is still binding we
are not aware, but should any intending to marry
during these seasons feel anxious, desiring to remain
" Safe in the arms of the Church;" it may be a question
whether they should not fortify themselves with a dis-
pensation from His Grace Dr. Benson.
Entire Congregation Spectators at "Mass."
Non-communicating attendance now taught by
Ritualists in connection with their High Celebration,
or High Mass (!) is a corrupt and degenerate Roman
practice against which the Reformation was aimed.
As the Homily of 1562 say, ''Every one of us must
be guests and not gazers, eaters and not lookers."
Ours is an Administration of the Lord's Supper,
not a Celebration nor a Theatrical Show. The title
" Mass " was discarded by the Revisors in 1552.
Episcopacy. Canon Eden says, " The govern-
ment of bishops in the Church. This mode of govern-
ment can be traced up to the Apostolic times, and
appears to be that which the Apostles established.
Our reformers have retained episcopacy ; but finding
in the N. T. no precept absolutely enjoining it in all
cases, they do not reckon it among the essentials of a
Church. (See Apostolical Succession and Bishops)
Evergreens. Tree and grove worship was a cor-
rupted reminiscence of the tree of life and the Garden
of Eden.
The fir-tree or pine was considered sacred inJAccad
more than 2,000 years before the time that Romulus
and Remus are supposed to have founded jRome, for
the fir or pine was the tree of life of the Accadians
and Assyrians after them, and in the monuments of
Nineveh Nisroch, the eagle-headed god and some
1 66 Evergreens.
others are represented bearing the sacred emblem, a
pine or fir cone, in the hand. The tree itself always
assumes a conventional form, but generally bears fir-
cones, and George Smith {C/ialdeaJi Account of Genesis,
by Sayce), speaking of the spot in the city of Eridu
where the solar hero Tarn muz was supposed to have
received his death-blow, says " A fragmentary bilingual
hymn speaks thus of the sacred spot and of the tree
of life that grew therein : —
*Tn Eridu a dark pine grew, in an illustrious place it
was planted "... and referring to the god
Khumbaba, adds, " He dwelt far away in the forest of
pines and sherbin cedars where the gods had their
abode."
The fir-tree was sacred in Rome to Bacchus, who,
it must be remembered here, was the same as the
Assyrian Dionysus. It was in common use during
the Saturnalia and his votaries carried fir or pine-
cones.
A canon of the second Council of Braga in Spain,
A.D. 561, forbade Christians to deck their houses with
bay leaves and green boughs at the same time with
the Pagans and the Council of Auxerre in France in
614, passed a canon to the same effect and Charle-
magne ordered all sacred trees and groves to be cut
down. When the abodes of the gods were first
brought under cover, in temples, churches and houses
it would be impossible to say, but the reason is given
m Bxa^nd's Antiquities {\st Qd. 18 10) who says "The
learned Dr. Chandler tells us, ' it is related where
Druidism prevailed, the houses were decked with ever-
greens in December, that the sylvan spirits might repair
to them, and remain unnipped with frost and cold
winds, until a milder season had renewed the foliage
of their darling abodes.' "
The " mystery of iniquity." And this is the origin
Pasting Coimminion — Feasts, 167
of our Christmas Decorations, which the Scotch abol-
ished at the Reformation.
Tree and grove worship still lingered in remote
parts of Norway when Olaus Magnus wrote in 1555,
and both trees and serpents are believed to have been
worshipped by the peasants of Esthonia and Finland
within the limits of the present century, at which time,
according to Cough's " Camden " (London, 1806) there
was a small grove of trees at Duthil in Strathspey,
Scotland, which was held in such veneration that
nobody would cut a branch out of it. (See Floral
Decorations})
Fasting- Communion. This is advocated on the
horrible degraded Romish notion oi \.h.Q actual presence
of Chris fs body in the stomach, and that it will meet
with other food there ! And yet tJiey are at liberty to
eat and driiik as much as they please immediately after!
The so-called " Real Presence" must then assimilate
with that food and pass away with it, but how does
that agree with Holy Writ, " Thou wilt not suffer Thy
Holy One to see corruption."
If fasting is only a natural and reverent instinct as
some say, is it not strange that the original institution
of the Supper was after a meal ?
The Agape founded on the Jewish Supper was fol-
lowed by the Communion and herein St. Paul virtually
condemns fasting communion, for he says " if any man
hunger let him eat at home " — /. e., let him eat some-
thing at home before he comes to the Holy Supper.
Some say it should be administered " very early in
the morning," as the hour of the Resurrection, but
Paul on the contrary tells us it was to show the Lord's
death till He come. (See Communion and Le7it.)
Feasts. If we strictly followed the calendar, and
we have no authority for making any exceptions, our
1 6S Feasts.
lives would be spent almost alternately in feasting and
fasting as there are about eighty Feast Days and one
hundred and twenty Vigils and Days of Fasting or
Abstinence.
Christmas, as already shown, is only the Pagan
Saturnalia or Bacchanalia, but with the rich the turkey
has replaced the goose, which however many still
think they must eat on the Romish Michaelmas (see
MicJiael, St.), and also religiously eat pancakes and
cross buns upon*certain other days. Before the Re-
formation, Brand tells us on Easter Eve and Easter
Day they sent quantities of hard boiled eggs to the
church, to get them blessed, and as an old writer,
quoted by him, says " These blessed eggs have the
virtue of sanctifying the entrails of the body, and are
to be the first fat or fleshy nourishment they take
after the abstinence of Lent."
The revels of Christmas formerly lasted until
Twelfth Day and sometimes, until the time of Charles
I., for twenty days. An improvement upon the
Saturnalia whiclvin the time of Claudius only lasted
seven days.
Why should the stomach enter so largely into our
devotions ? The answer is plain. Feasts and fasts
are all of Pagan origin, and the feasts were veritable
orgies, not only in Rome but in northern Europe.
Our forefathers not only drank immoderately, but they
even drank healths in honor of their gods. Hence
came the horrible custom in Germany and the north
of drinking to the health of our Saviour, the Apostles
and the saints, which the church was often weak
enough to tolerate.
It is strange that our Reformers^ retained these
tables, for as they abolished all the ecclesiastical
cookery regulations we do not know when we must
eat flesh and fish at the same meal, nor when we must
Feasts — Floj'al Decorations. 169
eat fish alone, nor when we may use butter or when
we may use dripping.
The Mahommadans are not allowed to smoke
during their Lent, the Ramazan, from daybreak until
sunset, and we remember the case of a friend in
Toronto, a strict High Churchman and fellow synods-
man, who was ruining his health by excessive
smoking and was advised by his doctors to give up
the practice. He did so, but zvaited until Lent, as
he said to us he thought that would be a good
time to commence. He absolutely appeared to think
he would gain credit from heaven for his abstin-
ence while in fact he was only following his medical
man's advice. (See Holy Days, Invocation and Lent.)
Floral DecOPations. Derived from the Pagans who
used flowers in their worship. What did Paul and
Barnabas say when the priests of Jupiter offered
flowers to them ? This presentation by the Pagan
priests is the only time that floral decorations are
mentioned in the Bible in connection with religious
worship.
Polydore Vergil, the Italian historian, who accom-
panied the Pope's legate to England in 1503, says
" Trimming of the temples with hangynges, flowers,
boughes and garlondes, was taken of the heathen
people which decked their idols and houses with
such array," and Sir Isaac Newton observes that "the
Heathen were delighted with the festivals of their
gods and unwilling to part with these ceremonies.
Therefore Gregory, Bishop of Neo-Caesarea, in Pontus,
(A.D. 264), to facilitate their conversion, instituted
annual festivals to the saints and martyrs ; hence
the keeping of Christmas with ivy, feasting, plays and
sports, came in the room of the Bacchanalia and
170 Floral Decorations.
Saturnalia ; the celebration of May-day with flowers,
in the room of the Floralia."
Strewing the dead and their graves with flowers
was a heathen custom reprobated by the primitive
Christians, but by the time of Prudentius (4th century)
they had adopted it.
In 1849, the late Dr. Philpotts, Bishop of Exeter,
a High Churchman of the old school, was announced
to officiate in one of the churches of Torquay. As he
entered the chancel he noticed two flower-pots on the
Holy Table. Without a moment of hesitation, and
without even calling for the sexton to remove them,
he seized the pots and dashed them on the floor in the
corner of the chancel. The minister who placed them
on the table was named Smith and he was afterwards
known as Flowerpot Smith.
The late revered Bishop Meade, of Virginia, con-
demned crosses, stars (as relics of the Pagan worship
of the sun, moon and stars) and flowers. " And now,"
he said, " what can evergreens, stars and flowers add
to the worship of GOD ? What the effect of evergreens
and a star and a cross in exciting religious joy, com-
pared with annunciation of the glad tidings, reading
the Gospel and the epistles, and the sweet hymns and
suitable sermons of a Christmas morning."
According to the English Churchman the Rev. W,
H. Wright, a Herefordshire rector, on coming into his
parish lately, removed the Ritualistic brass cross,
flower vases, candlesticks and the super altar from the
Communion Table. The bishop hearing of it required
the same to be replaced until a faculty or license was
duly obtained. " The faculty has now (1890) after
some delay, been issued by the proper authorities
and the ornaments have ceased to disfigure the church
in question." (See Evergreens and Harvest Festival.)
Font — Good Friday. 171
Font. In the Primitive Church the rites of baptism
were performed in springs or fountains and rivers. In
later days baptisteries were built outside the churches.
Later still fonts were admitted into the churches and
after the Reformation were generally placed near the
pulpit.
Staunton's Church Dictionary, New York, 1849,
shows how they were placed at that time before the
Puseyite movement.
" Font. A vessel usually placed in or near the
chancel to contain water for the administration of
Baptism." (See Baptising
Gloria Patri. In 1689, among the proposed alter-
tions of the Liturgy was, that " the Gloria Patri
should not be repeated at the end of every Psalm, but
of all appointed for morning and evening prayer."
Unfortunately this was not carried out, but a century
later the Americans adopted this change. On the 27th
evening we have seven verses and the Gloria, six and
the Gloria, seven and the Gloria, eight and the Gloria,
again eight and the Gloria, and finally four and the
Gloria, and on the 25th day, between the 33rd and
the 72nd verses of the same Psalm we sing the Gloria
five times. Is not this using " vain repetitions as the
heathen do ? "
Good Friday. At the time of the Reformation the
observ^ance of Good Friday was much neglected or
suppressed altogether as papistical, in the countries
that adopted the Protestant faith, and no wonder when
we consider how many superstitions were connected
with that day. Among other curious customs was
that of creeping to the cross, given in Brand's Antiqui-
ties. The royal usher was to lay a carpet for the
" Kinge to creepe to the crosse." The queen and her
172 Good Friday - Greek CJiiijrJi.
ladies were also to '' creepe to the crosse " and kiss it
In the province of Connaught in Ireland it was a com-
mon practice with the lower orders of Roman Catho-
lics to prevent their young from having any sustenance,
even those at the breast, from twelve on the previous
night to twelve on Friday night.
During the reigns of Elizabeth and James the First,
some respect seems to have been paid to this day in
England, but from the times of the civil wars this
practice was given up, and as is still the custom in
Scotland and some other Protestant countries, no
difference was made between Good Friday and any
other Fridays in the year.
The restoration of the day to holy consideration in
England was effected in 1777 by the Archbishop of
Canterbury, though not without violent animadver-
sions.
The newspapers were full of complaints, not only of
the shutting up of the city shops, but also because
many insisted the measure was calculated to carry us
back to the superstitions and ceremonies of the R. C.
Church. Notwithstanding which, however, the pri-
mate carried his point, that the day should be observed
as a holy-day — a day of fasting and prayer.
The cross bun now eaten by Romanists and our-
selves on Good Friday is Pagan and the cross is that
of Tammuz. These buns were called in Greek
'' boun " and Diogenus Laertius describes them by
that name. They were consecrated to Bacchus and
were used in his mysteries. Some were found in
Herculaneum, two of which were engraved in The
Rock about twelve years ago.
Greek Church. There are many who are making
every effort to bring about a union not only between
the Roman but also the Eastern Church and our own,
Greek C J lurch. 173
and it is time therefore that the people should know
what the Greco-Russian Church is.
The vast and numerous churches of the east are all
ruled over by patriarchs, archbishops, and bishops,
of whom the chief are the four Greek patriarchs of
Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem.
In Russia the Emperor is regarded as the head of the
Greek Church on earth and the king is the head of
the Church in Greece. These two sovereigns are
therefore virtually lay-patriarchs. The lesser churches
have already been referred to under Eastern Churches.
The supreme chief of the Greek Church is the
Patriarch of Constantinople, who is styled the Uni-
versal or CEcumenical Patriarch, Archbishop Universal,
Metropolitan of Constantinople, etc. He claims pri-
ority as using the language in which the Gospel was
first promulgated and is regarded as the head of
the Greek Church on earth in Turkey and Western
Asia, and this Successor of the Apostles (!) is created
by a Turk, a Mahommedan, the Sultan of Turkey ! ! !
He is generally the puppet of an intriguing faction
of the Greeks of the Fanar,* who elect for the office
some man of straw whom they feel secure they can
rule and which appointment they obtain by a heavy
bribe paid to the Sultan, and yet Dean Hook, in his
Church Dictionary, quoting Palmer, says " It is unde-
niable that they can produce a regular uninterrupted
series of bishops and of valid ordinations in their
church from the beginning No one denies the
validity of their ordination.''
Valid, forsooth ! Even if valid before the conquest,
which is more than doubtful, how can they be so when
for over four centuries, since the capture of Constanti-
* The quarter of Constantinople where the patriarch and the principal
Greek families reside.
174 Greek ChurcJi.
noplc by the Turks, the patriarchs themselves have
been created by the followers of the false prophet ?
Moreover, as Dr. Hook himself allows " As he pur-
chases his commission of the Grand Seignior, it
may be easil}' supposed that he makes a tyrannical
and simoniacal use of a privilege which he himself
holds by simony.
And yet his ordination is called valid!
The Patriarch of Constantinople nominates the
other Greek patriarchs and they are subsequently bal-
lotted for by the other bishops, and are confirmed in
office by the Sultan.
According to the last census there were nearly
seventy-three million adherents of the Greek Church
in Russia, and it has been estimated that there are
twenty millions out of Europe which we think an
over-estimate even if it included Roumania, with its
four and a-half millions, which was only separated
from Turkey twelve years ago. There are three and
a-half millions in Hungary. The population of Greece
amounts to 2,200,000, of whom nearly all belong to
the Greek Church.
The final schism between the Greek and Latin
Churches took place in the eleventh century. A vio-
lent and jealous spirit of animosity had for a long
while prevailed between the bishops of Rome and
Constantinople, commencing in the time of the
Emperor Zeno, A.D. 482, which broke out violently
in 858 when the Greek Emperor chose Fortius as
bishop of Constantinople in place of Ignatius, who
appealed to Rome where the Pope excommunicated
the Patriarch and the Patriarch returned the compli-
ment ! Two centuries later the contest was renewed
for the last time, when the Pope again solemnly ex-
communicated the Patriarch, who on his part burnt
Greek Church. 175
the Papal Bull and solemnly excommunicated the
Pope.
The Christian religion was introduced into Russia
in the tenth century from Greece, and hence naturally
the Patriarch of Constantinople sent them a Metro-
politan whenever a vacancy occurred. In 1588 the
Patriarch placed at their head an independent patriarch,
called the Patriarch of Moscow, on the terms that
every new one should inform him of his elevation and
obtain his confirmation.
In 1 72 1, Peter the Great suppressed this Patriarchate
and instituted a Holy Legislative Synod, with himself
as their head, and when Rabbe and Duncan wrote
(1854) the presiding officer of this Council (and the
equal therefore in Russia to the Archbishop of Can-
terbury with us) was General Protosoff, a cavalry
officer ! The Czar appoints to all offices and although
he permits the Holy Synod and the bishops to pre-
sent candidates for his approbation, tliis is merely an
act of politic courtesy on his part ; for he can refuse
the parties recommended and remove of his own will
and pleasure any incumbent, whatever his position.
In fact the Holy Synod is no more than a pliant tool.
The kingdom of Greece, when a Turkish province
naturally depended on the Patriarch of Constantino-
ple. The war of independence virtually freed the
small Church of this kingdom although its independ-
ence was not recognized by the Universal Patriarch
for some years. In 1852, however, it was finally
settled that superior ecclesiastical authority resides in
a permanent synod, composed of five members taken
from among the prelates, one of whom is the president
and metropolitan of Athens. The king names a
Royal Commissioner who presides over all, and any
decision come to or act done by the Holy Synod in
his absence, or not bearing his seal is void.
176 Greek CJiiircJi.
Edmond About says, " Greek Catholicism is a petri-
fied religion which has no longer any life in it. The
only duties which it prescribes to men are the signs of
the cross made in a particular manner, and in a certain
number, genuflections at such a place, worship mathe-
matically regulated of certain stereotyped, and, so to
speak, geometrical imiages ; the recitation of certain
interminable formulas which have become a dead letter ;
the observation of certain fasts ; the remaining idle
during a multitude of festivals which devour half the
year ; and finally the obligation of feeding the priests
and enriching the churches by perpetual alms."
Hommaire de Hell* says of the Russian Church,
" Religion which everywhere else constitutes the most
potent instrument of civilization, can have in Russia
no favourable effect on the improvement of the people.
Consisting solely in fasts, crossings and outward cere-
monies, it leaves the mind totally uninfluenced, and in
no respect acts as a bar to the demoralization which
is gradually pervading the immense class of the serfs.
As for the clergy whose numbers
amount to about 500,000,'f both males and females
(for the priests are allowed to marry), we mention
them here only to repeat our declaration of their
nullity and immorality. Utterly unacquainted with
anythingpertainingto polity and administration, having
nothing to do with public instruction, and being in
their own persons ignorant to excess, the priests enjoy
*This apyiarently peculiar name here, may require some explanation.
It has no reference to our word hell, which in Fiench \% enfer, but is
probably the name of some lordship, as there is a village in France
called Heille and another styled Helleville.
fin his table of the Russian population as published by the ministry
in 1836, he gives the following : — "•"â–
"Orthodox Greek Clergy of all grades, including the families ol
ecclesiastics, Males, 254,057, Females, 240,748."
Greek Church. \Jy
n6 sort of influence or consideration, and are occupied
solely with corporal things. We will not enter further
into this subject. We are loath to unveil completely
the vices and ignoble habits that distinguish the priests
of the Orthodox Russian Church."
The Russian Church claims like the original Greek
Church, a regular apostolic succession with valid ordi-
nations from the beginning. They deny the papal
supremacy and that the Church of Rome is the true
Catholic Church, look with disdain upon the Roman-
ists, and re-baptize all of them who are admitted into
their communion. They deny two natures in Jesus
Christ, maintaining that the Holy Spirit proceeds
from the Father only, but like the Romans hold that
tradition is of equal authority with Holy Scripture,
believe in seven sacraments and in transubstantiation,
for they teach that the sacrifice must be offered up on
altar or at least on a consecrated table-cloth or carpet.
When Pope Pius IX. (Pio Nono) took possession of
the Papal Chair in 1846, he addressed an official com-
munication to " The Easterns," imploring them to re-
turn to one fold and acknowledge the headship of the
Church as connected with the throne of St. Peter, but
as John Mason Neale informs us, they declined, telling
the Pope that Satan had been permitted, for purposes
best known to the Almighty, to introduce many here-
sies into the Church of GOD ; two of which they
named, — Arianism as the heresy of the ancient
Church, and Popery as the heresy of modern times.
Their ceremonies and rites are far more numerous
and complicated than the Roman, and it would fill a
volume to go through their various ritualistic forms.
We have elsewhere (see East at the Recital of the
Creed) referred to the Baptismal Office. This is fol-
lowed by the Sacrament of the Chrism, in which they
anoint the body, forehead, eyes nostrils, mouth,
12
178 Greek Chiircli.
breast, hands and feet. Dr. King* describes how this
so-called " holy ointment " is made, enumerating the
twenty-three ingredients of which it is composed. The
ceremony begins on Monday in Passion Week and
terminates on the Thursday, and during the whole of
that time this precious compound is boiling in a large
cauldron, night and day, the deacons with long rods
stirring it up. Every ingredient has to receive the
episcopal blessing and to be sprinkled with holy water
before it finds its way into the cauldron ; at the end
of the four days, priest after priest having in succession
been repeating the Gospels from the beginning of St.
Matthew to the end of St John, as often as is neces-
sary — they are not allowed to stop for a moment — the
bishop blesses the contents by making over them the
sign of the cross, and they are then placed in sacred
vessels and conveyed to the several towns in the
patriarchate.
Is it not almost described in Macbeth ?
' * Round about the cauldron go ;
In the poison'd entrails throw.
Boil them first in the charmed pot,
Fire burn and cauldron bubble,
For a charm of powerful trouble
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.
Double, double, toil and trouble,
Cool it with a baboon's blood.
Then the charm is firm and good."
At the Communion bread is crumbled into red wine
and given to the communicant with a spoon. In some
places, however, they have a small loaf something in
the shape of what is called a cottage loaf, which must
be always made by a nun or a priest's widow, but
* Rites and Ceremonies of the Greek Church in Russia.
Greek CJuircJi. xyg
never by less sacred hands. Out of this a very small
triangular piece is cut which the communicant takes
with the wine. Three years omission of taking the
sacrament is punished by penance, but Wraxall says
" I know Tchinovniks* who never go to the altar, but
who, by sending a red bank-note (ten roubles), receive
a testimonial as regular communicants, and Prof.
JVIorley, of University Coll. London, tells of a servant
of his who squared off his spiritual accounts with one
rouble.
Hommaire de Hell says " It is particularly on the
eve of a great church festival that the Russian priest
is sure of an abundant harvest of poultry, eggs and
meal .... As the Russian must then fulfil his
religious duties, whether he will or not, he is at the
mercy of the priest, who of course makes him pay as
dearly as he can for absolution, and keeps a regular
tariff, in which offences and punishments are set
down with minute precision. Thus for a theft, so
many dozens of eggs ; for breach of a fast, so many
chickens, etc. If the serf is refractory, the punishment
is doubled, and nothing can save him from it." Ri-
caut, quoted by Dr. Hook, says "The priests too often
make the best market they can, and fix a price on
their spiritual commodities in proportion to the devo-
tion or abilities of their respective customers."
The Russians do not consecrate cemeteries, saying
that the earth itself is consecrated by anointed and
consecrated bodies, and not the bodies by the earth.
They however consecrate private dwellings. Kohl
describes the consecration of a new house and tobacco
shop at which he was present. " Everything in the
establishment was spick and span new ; the polished
mahogany shone like looking-glasses .... A
*Government officials.
i8d Greek ChurcJi.
large company of guests, dressed for the occasion,
filled the rooms, crossing themselves and bowing, and
followed by some priests in sparkling pontificals,
singing and fumigating (he probably meant censing)
as they passed all the chests of tobacco and cigars,
all the divans, tables and chairs, consecrating and
sprinkling every corner, every wall, every window and
window seat, [and calling down the blessing of
Heaven upon them. The whole ended in an enter-
tainment, and while the ceremony was still going on
in the rear the business of selling was forthwith com-
menced in front, so that the blessing of Heaven
might be caught fresh and hot immediately after the
consecration."
When a Russian dies, says VVraxall, a regular pass-
port is laid under the head of the dead man, in which
the church attests by signature and seal that he was
attached to the true religion and performed its
duties without stumbling ; St. Nicholas is therefore
prayed to show him the right road to Heaven's gates
and not to refuse him a word of recommendation to
Peter.
Romanoff in his Rites and Customs of the Greco-
Russian Church, zuith introduction by Miss Yo7ige
(who has been styled the Novelist of Ritualism), calls
this printed document, an absolution, and says also
" It is a prayer, and not, as I have read in certain
books of travel in Russia, a passport to the next
world."
Of saint worship The EnglisJiivoman in Russia, says
" Almost every god and goddess of antiquity has a
corresponding saint in the Calendar, and many of
their high festivals are apparently merely those of
their Pagan creed under another name ; so difficult is
it to eradicate the idolatrous superstitions of a nation,
or to instil in the hearts of a people the sentiments of
Greek Church. i8i
a pure religion. The extreme reverence with which
the images of the Virgin and Child are regarded, and
their rich settings, are most probably only the adora-
tion of their former much-loved idol the Zolotaia
Baba, or the golden woman ; who according to their
mythology was the mother of the gods. It was
highly gilt and held in its arms the figure of a child.*
In the Russian Church the Virgin is never, I believe,
represented without the infant Christ."
Dr. Hook says, " They reject the religious use of
graven images and statues." This may be true of
the Oriental churches for we do not remember ever
having seen any in them, but in Russia images abound.
Wraxall says, " In a corner of a room hang large or
small glass boxes ; within them is a tin sun with a
hole in the centre ; beneath it tin drapery with two
holes. Out of the sun peers the face of the idol
(generally the Virgin with a dark brown gipsy
countenance) and in the lower holes the hands are
visible. Before a few images lamps burn constantly ;
before others they are only lighted on Saturday even-
ings and on the eves of Saints' days. Among the
rich the pictures are adorned with false pearls. The
pious Russian grows up in his religion before idols
made by carpenters and cabinet-makers. " Where is
God ? " the parent or nurse asks the infant, while
moving its hands mechanically on its forehead and
chest to teach it how to cross itself betimes. If he
has got so far as to point to the holy box where God
is, no one doubts its piety and sure prospect of that
felicity to which the adored picture is able to raise it."*!-
Shocking to relate, in many of the Churches and
*Only another form of Isis and her son Horus.
tWe hardly dared to give the author's own words. The idol might
have been described as a god (small g).
1 82 Greek CJinrcJi.
elsewhere are paintings of the Creator, who is generally
represented under the figure of an aged man with long
white hair and beard, having the triangle either in the
hand or above the head.
Lacroix says, *' All the pictures which ornament
the Russian Churches are without exception framed
over with plates of silver, or of copper plated with
silver. On account of this metallic cuirass, you can
only see the outline of the figure, the head, the hands,
the feet, and generally all the parts of the body where
the flesh is naked. There is nothing more strange
and barbarous than this ; and that which renders the
pictures still more singular, is the gilded circle of light
around the head of the saints, also in metal. The
rays which compose this crown are detached from the
silver plate."
Some years ago there was an account in the papers
of a Church festival in St. Petersburg when the
Emperor went up to the image of the Virgin on the
altar and kissed it.
" There are but few of the Russians (continues
Lacroix) who do not carry about with them a small
image of St. Nicholas, their great patron, and they
shew great respect for this talisman whenever they
wish to have good luck. All the soldiers, without ex-
ception possess one of these holy images ; they think
that it will keep them from being killed
Whenever a Russian passes by a chapel, or an image
of a saint he salutes it, prostrates himself before it
and mutters his prayers. The god or the saints which
the soldiers and peasants carry in their pockets is also
an object of faith eminently characteristic. You often
see a peasant take his small idol from its sanctuary,
that is to say from his pocket, spit upon it and rub it
with his hands to clean it. then place it before himself
upon a piece of furniture or stone, and fall upon his
Greek Church. 183
knees making a thousand signs of the cross, fetching
deep sighs, crying out ' My God ! have mercy upon
me ! ' The ceremony being finished, he shuts it up
in the box and puts his Httle god in his pocket."
Lest it should be said we have quoted too many
foreign writers, for About, de Hell and Lacroix are
Frenchmen and Kohl is a German, our readers can
refer to a modern work — Syrian Stone Lore — wherein
Conder, who has been engaged for several years in
exploring Palestine, says only in 1886, " The Eastern
clergy do not bear as a rule, in our own times, any
better reputation than that which honest, moderate,
and pious men such as Gregory or Cyril of Jerusalem
have recorded against them in the fourth century.
They are still as then chosen from illiterate peasants ;
they are often vicious and corrupt ; they are utterly
ignorant of all the best results of modern progress.
Good men are found among them still ; but self-
advancement, which is the vulgar ambition of the
many, is attained by arts and deeds which disgrace
the Church in the eyes of the world."
Of the times erf Jerome, Chrysostom or Cyril of
Jerusalem, as preserved in their writings, he adds,
" The popular religion is pourtrayed by the fathers in
a manner which shows it to have been exactly similar
to that of the modern Syrian or Italian peasantry.
Superstition and profanity existed side by side, and
the most fanatical were in some cases also the most
licentious The pilgrimages also were
not free from scandalous abuses and the gross super-
stition of the age is perhaps most plainly traceable in
the contemporary records of visits to holy places.
. . . Chrysostom tells us that some pilgrims
visited the dunghill of Job in Arabia
and that Noah's ark was still to be seen on a moun-
tain in Armenia. Lot's wife also, from an early period
184 Greek CJiurcJi,
is mentioned as standing and Antoninus Martyr is
careful to combat the opinion that the pillar of salt
was destroyed through its constant licking by ani-
mals."
Lest it should be thought incredible that Priestly
Absolution could be carried so far in a civilized
country as to give what are not unaptl}^ styled by
Wraxall " Passports," for they are placed in the dead
man's hand (not under the head), we will close this
article with the document itself.
" Before the corpse is taken to its last resting place
the priest reads aloud a printed paper in the Sclavonic
language, which he afterwards places in the dead
man's hand The prayer, or rather absolu-
tion, is printed on a large sheet of paper, with small
medallion-like vignettes of the Saviour, His mother,
and St. John the Baptist. It reads as follows, with a
space (....) left for the Christian name of
the deceased to be written in : —
" Our Lord Jesus Christ, by His Divine grace and
gift when He bestowed on His Holy Apostles and
Disciples the power to bind and loose the sins of men,
said 'Receive ye the Holy Ghost : whosesoever sins ye
remit they are remitted unto them ; and whosesoever
sins ye retain they are retained.' From whom this
power being conveyed by succession even unto us,
through me be spoken the absolution of this ghostly
child ( . . . . ) of all sins that are committed by
man against GOD, by word, deed or thought, willingly
or unwillingly, consciously or unconsciously. And
if he were under the curse or excommunication
of a Bishop or Priest, or under the curse of his father
or mother, or if he broke his own vow, or in any other
way sinned as a man, but repented of all with a con-
trite heart — be all these sins and bonds absolved to
(him or her), and as a weakness of our nature be con-
Guilds — Harvest Festivals. 185
signed to oblivion, for His mercy's sake, through the
prayers of our most pure and most blessed Lady and
Mother of God, the eternal Virgin Mary, of the Holy
Ghost and of the most laudable Apostles and all
Saints. Amen.' "*
Is the union to be with the Greek, the modern
Greek or the Russo-Greek Church ? If the latter, is
the Czar to be the Head of the United Church, for it
is hardly to be supposed that with his 70 millions he
will take a secondary position ? (See Easterti Church
and Priest.)
Guilds. Guilds as the historian Madox tells us
were abolished at the Reformation " because of their
inherent superstition." They were first introduced by
the Pagans and Popery borrowed them. The Refor-
mation swept them out of the Church ; and now, after
lying quiescent for more than three hundred years,
they are again galvanized into existence.
HarvesfSFestivals. Harvest homes were formerly
common in England, but they were not celebrated in
churches. A supper was provided for the harvest
men and servants, master and servants sat at the same
table, conversed freely together, and spent the evening
in dancing and singing.
A remarkable German letter first published in
English in the Union Reviezv for 1867, enumerates
harvest festivals among the other agencies for edu-
cating the people for " Catholic Practice," adding : —
" The service is generally a musical one ; the vil-
lage church is sure to be decorated with flowers
and fruit for the occasion." The Rev. Hely Smith
says, " It is well for the people of England to know
that these apparently praiseworthy and very popu-
*Sketches of the Rites and Customs of the Greco-Russian Church by
R. H. Romanoff. Rivingtons, Jondon, 1868, p. 246.
1 86 Harvest Festivals — Hidi aiid Loiv Church.
lar services were introduced for the express pur-
pose of accustoming them to the ornate ritual of
Rome."
Bishop Ryle says '* God's House is not meant to be
an exhibition of flowers, corn, fruit, evergreens and
ferns, but a place for prayer, praise, and the preaching
of the Word." A church should not be turned into a
flower garden. As we said of the Chancels, are the
flowers and fruit and tawdry decorations intended for
the honour of that GOD zvho is 7tot zvorsJiipped by
man's hands, or for the admiration of that GOD who
has not eyes of fiesJi and sees not as miserable man
sees ?
We walk by faith not by sight.
Even Dr. Maclagan, Bishop of Lichfield, complains.
He says " I have more than once found even the
sanctuary (chancel) so piled up and blocked with
leaves and vegetables as to make the celebration (ad-
ministration) of Holy Communion a matter of diffi-
culty." (See Floral Decoratiojts).
High and Low Chupch. Dr. Short, bishop of St.
Asaph says : " The declaration of open war between
the High and Low Churcii parties may be considered
to have taken place in 1566."
Laud, however, in his diary preserved a strict ac-
count of the bias of the clergy, marking them O and
P, Orthodox and Puritan. He was beheaded in 1645,
The first mention of the term High, of which we
have any knowledge was some years later, when it
was used not in respect, but the contrary, for Pepys, in
his Diary, in 1661 (Mar. 20) says, '* The Bishops are so
high that very few do love them," and again (Aug. 31)
while complaining of the fearful depravity of the
Court of Charles the Second " and the clergy so high,
that all people that I meet do protest against their
HtgJi and Loiv Church. 187
practice." In 1689, Sir Thomas Maynard, first Com-
missioner of the Great Seal, said, " As for the clergy
I have much honor for both High and Low of them,"
and in 1703, Hooper, Bishop of Bath and Wells, re-
gretted the terms " High Church and Low Church "
since the party to which he belonged only desired the
church's welfare ; and the other party he did not
believe were averse to Episcopal order."
The best definition of a Low Churchman is that of
the great and good Dr. Mcllvaine, bishop of Ohio,
who was charged by Bishop Onderdonk as being a
" Low, or rather, Half Churchman," and who replied
as follows :
" Is it characteristic of a Low CJiurcJiDian that he
lightly esteems the forms of Episcopal Church Govern-
ment ? That he lightly esteems the liturgy ? That
he lightly regards the articles and homilies in which
the doctrines of the church are contained ? Then the
individual accused is far from a Low Churchman.
Is it characteristic of a Low Churchman that he
does not believe in the exclusive divine right of epis-
copacy ; that he does not deny the validity of all
ordinations which have not been performed by a
bishop ; that he cannot consider all those Christian
brethren who do not receive the sacraments from
ministry episcopally ordained as destitute of the sacra-
ments of the Gospel, and that he finds it neither in
the Bible, the doctrines of the church, nor in his own
heart, to give up all his brethren who are not partak-
ers of ordinances episcopally administered, to nothing
more comforting nor scriptural than what are called
by some, regarded as LLigJi Churchmen^ ' uncovenanied
mercies of GOD ! ' If so, Mr. Mcllvaine is very free to
own that in all these particulars he is one of tJie most
decided of Low Churchmen. As for the exclusive
divine right of episcopacy, Mr. Mcllvaine has never
cared to conceal that lie does not believe it.
1 88 HigJi and Loiv CJuircJi — Holy Days.
Again. Is it characteristic of a Lo7v ChiircJiman
that he can unite and mingle with brethren of other
churches in the promotion of those schemes for the
extension of the knowledge of the ' truth as it is in
Jesus ' which involves no doctrine but what is com-
mon to all Christians ? If so, then Mr. Mcllvaine is
very ready to own, what he has always publicly
manifested, that he is, indeed a Low CJiiirchman.
Again. Is it characteristic of a Low CJiurc]iina7i
that he does not believe in what is called baptismal re-
ge7ieration ; or in other words, the doctrine that the
inzuard grace of regetieration ALWAYS accompanies the
outward sign of baptism, so that baptized persons
ought never to be addressed as if nnregenerated or
unconverted ? If so, Mr. Mcllvaine hopes no one will
for a moment hesitate to believe that in this particular
most distinctly he is a Loiu CJiurcJiinan.
Holy Days. — '* Six days shalt thou labor and do
all th>' work " — three hundred and thirteen days in
the year. The Church improves upon this and declares
that there shall be about one hundred and fifty cere-
monial days (not including Sabbaths), all of which
tends to detract from the Lord's Day, and leaving
only about one hundred and sixty days for work in-
stead of over three hundred. Of the above ceremonial
days about one hundred are Feast Days which
if we followed our P B. should be treated as such,
but now jollity (church) is principally confined to
Christmas.
In TcrtuUian's time (ob. A.D. 225) only three Holy
Days besides the Lord's Day are mentioned, viz.,
Good Friday, Pasch (afterwards called by us Easter),
and Pentecost or Whitsunday, and even then, less than
two centuries after our Lord's death, Tcrtullian asks,
why, in the face of St. Paul's language as to times anci
Imposition of Hands — Incense, 189
seasons Fasch is celebrated. These three are also the
only ones that were generally observed in Origen's time
(ob. A.D. 254). Jerome, who died in 420, protested
against the multiplying of obligatory fasts, many of
which were derived from the Pagans, for in their mys-
tic ceremonies they had both feasts and fasts. (See
Feasts.)
Imposition of Hands. The laying on of hands
was not adopted by the Roman Church until about
one thousand years after Christ, and was abandoned
in 1439 under the authority of the Council of Florence,
and the ordination without the imposition of hands
was declared valid by Roman Canon Law. It has
never been used in the Greek Church, and was of
course given up in England at the above time. Pro-
fessor Hatch, who proves that the rite was not uni-
versal anciently, adds, " it is impossible that, if it was
not universal, it can have been regarded as essential."
It is not mentioned in the P. ii. of 1552, and the
words " now committed unto thee by the imposition
of our hands " were introduced in 1662 by Archbishop
Sheldon and his clique. To Charles the Second's
bishops we are therefore indebted for this doctrine,
but the chain having been twice broken, we repeat the
query made under Apostolical Succession— How do the
admirers of this doctrine bridge over the first gap of
1000 years and the second of over 200 years ?
Incense. God Himself prescribed the mgredi-
ents and quantities for making incense. He directed
that priests alone should offer it, and that it should be
lighted only by fire from heaven. And the penalty
for infringing each rule was DEATH 1
None, not even the Jews themselves, know what
Hebrew words the spices mentioned specify, nor are
1 90 Intoning— Invocation of Virgin and Saints.
tJiere any priests left, for the line of Aaron has became
extinct.
RituaHsts quote : " In every place incense shall be
ofifered unto my name," but the Prophet did not allude
to the literal burning of incense. The word was
simply used as a symbol for prayer. The use of in-
cense has been condemned by the courts.
Intoning". If proper or necessary in churches, why
not elsewhere ? Why should not an M. P. intone —
" If you please Mr. Spea-ker will you be kind e-nough
to grant the pray-er of my pe-ti-tion .'' " Intoning is
not the way people would pray when the circumstan-
ces around them were unusually solemn. If, during
Divine Service on one of our steamers they should be
praying in this unnatural way, and were suddenly told
that the ship had sprung a leak and they would all be
in eternity in a few moments, would they continue
their intoning and monotoning then ? St. James
draws a distinction, " Is any among you suffering ?
Let him pray. Is any cheerful ? Let him sing
praise. We have shown elscnvhere why intoning w^as
" temporarily " retained at the Reformation.
When the prayers are read by the minister alone
the people should respond in an audible and natural
voice. They should not plead for forgiveness in har-
mony, neither should the choir respond in carefully
modulated but unnatural voices. (See Choral
Services^
Invocation of Virgin and Saints. To which many
have been led by the Saints' Day Services and Hymns,
all of which tend to didia or saint-worshipping.
So soon was the " mystery of iniquity " already at
work that only twenty-five years after our Lord's
death, St. Paul was forced to tell the Galatians, '' Ye
Invocation of Virgin and Saints. 191
observe days, and months, and times, and years," for
they had evidently retained or restored the ceremonies
of the Pagans, who both feasted and fasted, and had
turned their gods and dii-niinores, lesser gods or demi-
gods into saints and martyrs.
Our P. B, was never thoroughly reformed and still
contains too many " bits of scarlet " as the late
lamented Dean Alford called them.
At the Reformation our Calendar was formed after
the Roman, where the Saints' Days had been inserted
by different Popes between the fourth and thirteenth
centuries, the last having only been placed there about
A.D. 1256, when it pleased a Pope to decree that the
25th of July was St. James' Day, although the Greek
Church says it was April 30, the Armenian Church,
Dec. 28, and the Coptic Church, April 12. The
Roman and English Churches (alas, that there should
still be so much in common between us) call April 25,
St. Mark's Day, while the Greek Church celebrate it
on Jan. 11, and the Coptic on the 23rd Sept., and as
St. Mark is said to have been martyred in Alexandria,
it would seem, if a7iy are triie^ which is very doubtful,
that the Coptic is the real date.
In 695 the Church {i. e. Pope Sergius) decreed that
the blessed Virgin was born on the 8th of September,
for which there was not the slightest proof whatever ;
but we still recognize that decree by retaining " Na-
tivity of Virgin Mary " in our Calendar. The Ameri-
cans dropped it and their example was followed by
the Irish and other revised Prayer Books.
The Puritans always complained about the Saints'
Days, and in 1662, "for the charitable purpose of an-
noying them " as Isaac Taylor says, " the Bishops
added a great many to the Calendar, among them
being a few popes."
In all the Revisions from the American in 1789,
192 Invocation of Virgin and Saints.
the Romish saints' days have been expunged, but irt
all except the R. E. P. B. they have retained the days
of the Apostles, implying thereby that they are true
anniversaries, but no one knows the dates of the births
or deaths of any of the Apostles.
The term " Saints " has been much abused. In the
Greek Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are
not called Saints, and at the late Revision of the Bible
the American Committee desired to have that title
struck out but the English Committee refused.
Before the time of Pope John XV, who in 993
claimed the right as his sole prerogative, so far as the
Western Church was concerned, or according to others
Pope Alexander, A.D. 11 70, not only Councils but
even bishops could manufacture saints, and they were
multiplied in proportion to the demand.
When we sing " For all the Saints," we sing not
only for all the Romish Saints," but also for Saint
Pontius Pilate, iox Neale in his History of the Eastern
Church says that he is one of their Saints ! The
reason assigned being simply this, that in attesting
his conviction that the Lord Jesus was a just man,
he took water and washed his hands !
Brand in his Antiquities devotes several pages to
" All the Holy Angels " showing that the following
saints are invoked against various diseases ; St.
Apollonia and St. Lucy against the toothache ; St.
Blaise against bones sticking in the throat ; St. Clara
against sore eyes ; St. Genow against the gout " ; etc.,
etc. " St. Cecilia is the patroness of musicians ; St.
Dismas and St. Nicholas preside over thieves ; St.
Magdalene and St. Brigit preside over common
women ; St. Martin and St. Urban over ale-knights
to guard them from falling into the kennel {i.e. to pre-
vent ale-house tipplers from falling into the gutter) ;
Invocation of Virgin and Saints.
193
St. Matthew over fools " ; etc., etc. St. Anthony pro-
tects hogs ; St. Feriol protects the keepers of geese ;
St. Gertrude presides over mice and eggs ; St. Hubert
protects dogs and is invoked against the bite of mad
ones. etc. And as among the Pagans Mars presided
over ancient Rome, Apollo and Minerva presided
over Athens, Juno over Carthage, Venus over Cyprus
and Diana over Crete, so in place of the tutelar gods.
Papal Rome gave St. George to England and also to
Portugal and Sicily ; St. Andrew to Scotland, Bur-
gundy, Russia and Prussia ; St. Patrick to Ireland ;
St. Denis and St. Michael to France ; St. Anthony
to Italy, etc.
Other countries were more favoured than Old Eng-
land, for while we have only a third interest in St.
George alone, Portugal has also St. James and St.
Sebastian — two and one-third to our one-third of a
saint only — Prussia, St. Albert, and Russia, St. Mary
and St. Nicholas.
The relations between Great Britain and Portugal
were lately strained on account of the trouble in
Africa and had it resulted in war, St. George being
the patron of both countries, the question might be
asked of those who believe in Invocation of Saints
whether he would have cried out for fair play and
joined little Portugal or that party which had the
most men and guns.
Wheatly says St. George was a colonel (!) in the
army of Diocletian. Baring-Gould relates his fabu-
lous history. According to some accounts the tortures
of this martyr continued through seven years and the
Oriental Christians say he suffered at least seven mar-
tyrdoms and revived after each, the last excepted.
The foundation of the myth seems to be that there
may have been a Christian named George who was
martyred in 303, as a so-called " Saint " of that name
13
194 T evocation of Virgin ciJid Saints.
was worshipped about that period (probably this same
George) or that he may have been confounded with
George, bishop of Alexandria, who really was mar-
tyred about that time, or what is most likely that it
may have been another case of amalgamation of a
Pagan god and a Christian Saint, for Mr. Haring-
Gould, who devotes fifty pages to the subject, thinks
that he was probably a Christianized Tammuz.
St. George is one of our acknowledged saints to be
remembered not only on his own day (April 23) but
on All Saints' Day also.
Should we not hesitate, however, before doing this
for what proof have we that this George is not a Mo-
hammedan ? He is called el Khouder (the Mighty ?).
With us it is to be presumed he is a Protestant, but in
Portugal he must certainly be a Roman Catholic !
Gherghis (very similar to the Latin) el Khouder, is
greatly venerated by the Turks, who say he lived in
the time of the Prophet and is not yet dead, but flies
round and round the world.
Some may say this is absurdity heaped upon
absurdity, but the end is not yet. We have shown
that Anthony protects the pigs, as well as the Italians,
but yet he only ranks with Lieutenant-Colonels ! ! ! This
cannot be denied as it is official, he having been raised
to that rank in 18 14, by John VI., King of Portugal,
who conferred upon good St. Anthony the rank of
Lieut.-Colonel in the Portuguese army for services
rendered to the said army. The document published in
the Revista Militar — the official military journal -
says, " Therefore we have resolved to raise (!) him to
the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel of Infantry. He will
receive the usual pay through our P'ield-Marshal de
Cuntra. Given at the Capital August i, 1814."
This was published ivin the London Daily Neivs\on
August 4, 1879, and it was added that the pay for
Invocation of Virgin and Sai^its. 195
sixty-five years to that date had been regularly drawn
by somebody for this eminent member of the Church
Militant, Lieutenant-Colonel Saint Anthony.
It would seem as if the intention of gazetting St.
Anthony must have been under consideration, for some
little time at least, among the Portuguese, for almost at
the same period that he was received into the army of
Portugal he recei'-ed the like honor in Brazil. In the
first case however the Saint himself was gazetted while
in the latter his image only was made Colonel.
The following is from the London Titbits of Feb.
14, 1 891 : '• Owing to the revolution in Brazil, St.
Anthony found himself in a state of pecuniary embar-
rassment. However, a recent order issued by the
Brazilian Minister of War to the Exchequer has put
him straight again. The order runs as follows : — * The
claim put forward by the Provincial of the Franciscans,
Fr. Joas do Amor Divino Costa, has been duly con-
sidered, and as the decree of the 26th July, 18 14, con-
ferring upon the image of St. Anthony of Rio de
Janeiro the appointment of Lieutenant-Colonel of
Infantry has not been revoked by any public act, he
shall in future receive the pay to which he is
entitled.' "
We have said this much because some of our
bishops are endeavoring to introduce the invocation
of saints into our Protestant Church, and some of our
modern Church Dictionaries, such for instance as
Smith and Cheetham's Dictionary of Christian Antiqui-
ties, are perfect Hagiologies.
Under Alexander, in this latter work, are recorded
twenty different bishops, martyrs or nobodies (as No. 2),
many of whom are undoubtedly fabulous. This name
commences thus : —
" Alexander ( I ), martyr under Decius, commemo-
rated Jan. 30. {Mart. Rom. Vet) "
196 Invocation of Virgin and Saints.
(2.) Commemorated Feb. 9. {Mart. Bedae.) "
Absolutely not a word more about No. 2. No
place, year date, nor whether patriarch, bishop or
martyr.
Under Martialis are thirty-five — and to these thirty-
five names there is not a single year date given.
Nothing but the days on which they must be invoked.
Under Marcus are thirty-eight, with only one of
whom we have anything to do, but under Maximus
are no less than sixty-two. Three of the Marks have
year dates added and nine of such dates are given to
the sixty-two called Maximus.
What have Protestants to do with these — are they
" Christian xA.ntiquities " ?
Of the famous Bishop of Hippo we read " AuGUS-
TINUS, Bishop of Hippo, confessor Aug. 28," with a
few lines about his day which seems to have varied in
different places. " CuRYSOSTOM, St. John, is com-
memorated Nov. 13 {Cat. Byzant EtJiiop.)',^ to which is
added seven lines about his festival and the transla-
tion of his relics. No year date to him or to Augus-
tine. Jerome was the most learned man of his day,
and in his case a year date is given, but all that is said
of him is — " Hieronymus. Presbyter (t420 A.D.) ;
deposition of Bethlehem Judah, Sep. 30. {Mart. Rom.
Vet., Hieron, Bedae., Adonis, Usuardi.) "
Is comment necessary ?
There is a Hymn to the Angels where we entreat
them to " Sing us sweet fragments of the songs
above (!) " and the Rev. Nevison Loraine showed
pretty evidently where Faber, the pervert drew
his ideas when he sang to the " Angels of Jesus."
In the Monastic Breviary of our Most Holy Father
Benedict is the following :— " MoNKS AND NUNS,
Angels of Jesus ! Singing mid the night shades
of earth, Sing on, tire not. Virgin choirs, sing on, tire
Jesus the Christ. 197
not." Are these Virgin choirs of Monks and Nuns
the angels to whom Protestants sing hymns ?
That we may not be guilty of the blasphemy of
saint-worshipping, perhaps the wisest plan is not to
join such of the choir and congregation as do sing
hymns to saints and angels.
Dean Goode once said, " How few have the courage
to sit down when some obnoxious hymn or verse is
sung, either dishonoring to GOD or contrary to the
doctrines of the word of GOD and the Saviour." (See
Alban St., All Saints and Calendar^
Jesus the Christ. Is not the name of our most
blessed Lord treated with undue familiarity, to use
far too mild a term, in many of our modern Hymnals ?
No one would address his earthly father as John,
James or Tom, nor would any one address the Queen
as Victoria, but our heavenly Lord is constantly ad-
dressed as " Jesus " without either the prefix of Lord
or the suffix of the Anointed.
He Himself said " Go and say the Master saith,"
instead of which we call the Master " Gentle Jesus,
Sweet Saviour, Royal Child, Babe Divine, Holy Child,
Infant Redeemer." There is a reason for crowding
these pet titles upon us, as by them people are gradu-
ally accustomed to the Romish error of considering
Him as still a child subservient to His blessed mother,
which is not very far from worshipping the Madonna
and Child.
There is no Babe Divine, no Royal Child, no In-
fant Redeemer. Our Redeemer was not an infant,
but a Man, the Man Christ Jesus, who had attained
the ripe age of thirty-three years before He died and
ascended into Heaven where He is now a living
Saviour interceding for us. It is true He is called
Holy Child in Acts iv, 27, but every scholar knows
198 Jesus the Christ.
that is ail incorrect translation, for it should be Holy
Servant, and is so rendered in the Revised Version.
He was Jehovah's Servant.
In the Hymn by Cardinal Newman, (the last hymn
written by him before he went over to the Church of
Rome) He is called " Kindly Light," so-styled of
course because He said He was the Light of the world,
but He said also that He was the Door ? Shall we
then pray O, kindly Door ? He said He was the true
vine. Must we pray then, O, kindly Vine, have mercy
upon us ?
There are several instances where the titles given to
our Lord in the Sinaitic and other oldest MSS. are
omitted in the Authorized Version, as for instance
Matt, xvi, 21. For "Jesus," read "Jesus Christ."
Luke, X, 39. For"Jesus's" read "the Lord's." 41.
For "Jesus" read "the Lord." Acts xix. 13. For
"Jesus" read "the Lord Jesus," and some others.
Did not our Lord say, " One is your Master, even
Christ.'*" Peter, when sinking, called Him Lord, and
at the Last Supper, the Disciples, even the most inti-
mate, the beloved one, called him Lord. Stephen,
when dying, saw the Heavens opened and the Son of
Man standing at the right hand of GOD, and his last
words were, Lord — Lord Jesus !
But it is not the Second Person of the Trinity alone
who is treated with worse than dishonor. David says,
'• Holy and reverend is His name," but we say of
some of our prelates that they are Right reverend,
and o f others that they are superlatively so. We
boast of our open Bibles, and while we read that the
name of the Lord God of Heaven and Earth is
Reverend we say that our Archbishops are MoST
Reverend. And do not these makers of ambassa-
dors love to have it so. We venture to say that should
a minister dare to discard these titles he would have
John tJie Baptist, St. — Lent. 199
to wait a long while before being created a church
dignitary.
John the Baptist, St, The day of the summer
solstice, June 24, was sacred to On or Cannes. In
the sixth century the Roman Church incorporated it
in their calendar, cunningly changing Cannes into
Johannes, the Latin for John. (See Calendar and
Paganism.)
Kneeling" in the Creeds. The rubric says the
creeds shall be said standing. It is the same also in
the Irish, the American, the English Revised and also
the English, the Canadian and the American R.E.,
and the Spanish Prayer-Books, eight in all.
Lectionary. (See Lessons.)
Lent. Ln the N. T. not a single Stated Fast is pre-
scribed, nor any exhortation to fasting made, such as is
repeatedly made to prayer and thanksgiving.
Both Dean Alford and Tischendorf showed that the
word "fasting" was an interpolation in the N. T. in
four places (Matt. xvii. 21, Mark, ix. 29, Acts, x. 30,
and I Cor., vii. 5). and the Revised Version agrees
with them, and it was undoubtedly the cunning work
of those who desired to have Biblical authority for
fasting, against marrying in Lent, etc.
The Jewish religion was a religion of ceremony.
Ours is not, and when our Lord upbraided the Jews
for not keeping their fast. He taught very plainly that
He did not approve of ceremonial fasting. When he
said that when he was taken away His disciples would
fast, did he mean that they would keep a ceremonial
fast, or that like David they would be so overcome
with sorrow that they would not care to eat .''
200 Lent.
" My heart is smitten and withered hke grass ; so
that I forget to eat my bread."
If the former was the case, when did His disciples
keep that ceremonial fast ?
When our P. B. was compiled the Epistles and
Gospels for Lent were continued from the old offices,
and it appears strange that our Reformers did not
notice that it had been impossible to find an Epistle
for that day deemed so important, the first day of
Lent, called the Head of the Fast, and that in the
old Service Books they had been compelled to fall
back to one of the lesser Prophets of the O. T., and
to this day the words " Turn ye even to me . . .
with fasting .... sanctify a fast," are read to
us as if it was Biblical authority for a stated fast of
forty days, even should the season be a prosperous
one, and more fitted for thanksgiving than for mourning.
On the contrary, however, Joel foresaw an impend-
ing calamity of a water famine and plague of locusts
and exhorted the Jews to keep a fasty^r that particu-
lar occasion only I
Was not our Lord's forty days fast part of His
temptation, for it was only after he was so weak with
fasting that Satan made proposals to him } No stress
whatever is laid upon it in the N. T. ; in fact Mark
does not even mention it and it is entirely ignored in
the Epistles.
It is often called a miraculous fast, but where was
the miracle } We are not told that He did not eat nor
drink as in Esther's case, but only that He fasted or
restricted Himself to a very plain diet, perhaps bread
or even berries and roots only, and after forty days of
such a diet He naturally hungered terribly.
Christ fasted forty days once only. If he had meant
to lay down a law for an anniversary fast, why did
He not fast repeatedly?
Lent. 20 i
If we are following His example why do we fast
repeatedly when he only fasted once ?
Why did not the Apostles keep the Lenten fast ?
Paul lived more than thirty years after our Lord's
death and wrote fourteen epistles, in not one of which
does he recommend fasting !
What Paul said was, "IN EVERYTHING by prayer
and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests
be made known unto GOD." In everytJiing — but not
one word about fasting.
Lent originally had no connection with the forty days
in the desert. It was first established by a Pope
about A.D. 130, as a tithe of the year or thirty-six
days only. This lent of thirty-six days lasted for
some centuries. It is not certain when the additional
four days were added. Some authorities say in 487,
while others place it as late as the time of Pope
Gregory II, who died in 731. The additional four
days were not recognized in Scotland, however, until
the end of the eleventh century, and five centuries
later the Presbyterians abolished Lent entirely.
Cassian called the Monk of Marseilles, a disciple of
Chrysostom, who, according to Canon Robertson,
" was a person of considerable note and influence,"
writing in the fifth century, and contrasting the Primi-
tive Church with that of his day, said : " It ought to
be known that the observance of the forty days had
no existence so long as tJie perfection of that Primitive
Church remained inviolate^
In plain English, Lent was a Church, not Christian
ceremony introduced to give power to the clergy and
principally to enable the " priests " to fleece the laity,
and to this day dispensations can be obtained for
money to eat meat on fasting days in the Roman and
Eastern Churches, and others who break the Church
^02 Lent.
laws are obliged to reveal it in the confessional and
are mulcted accordingly.
A late writer says of the Abyssinians that " Their
religion is mostly a formality ; their priests are ignor-
ant their chief service consisting of a
repetition of an extensive liturgy, and Christianity
[Jie should have said CJiiircJiianity) is an observance of
rites, ceremonies and good deeds. They celebrate
about two hundred fast days, and whoever is not able
to fast so long and often informs the priest who for a
pecuniary consideration undertakes the task for him."
The Armenians, according to Dr. Hook, " scrupu-
lously observe fasting ; and fasts so frequently occur
that their whole religion seems to. consist in fasting;"*
and the Ternoin de la Verite stated that in Equador,
where there is a Romish Church for every 150 inhabi-
tants, and one tenth of the population consists of
priests, monks and nuns, 270 days in the year are
either fast or fete days. Three quarters of this holy
(! !) South American State can neither read nor
write.
The Russians have a proverb, " Heaven can only
be reduced by famine," and they have accordingly
four stated Fasts, viz., the Four Great Lents. Of
Easter, seven weeks ; St. Peter's Fast from Trinity
Monday, from twenty to forty days, according to the
time when Easter falls ; the Assumption, in August,
seventeen days, and the Christmas Fast from the 15th
of November, thirty-nine days, besides which there are
the six great days of prayer and repentence and
thirty-one Wednesdays and as many Fridays, Total
165 to 195 days.
During all this time neither meat nor fish (during
the Easter Lent) are allowed, nor eggs, nor milk, nor
*When Dr. Hook wrote this had he forgotten that our P. B. enjoins
us to fast about loo days, or nearly one-third of the year !
Lent. 203
even sugar. Marriages are prohibited, and the mar-
ried must Hve as if they were single.
" As for the rich," as Lacroix says, *' they buy the
right of Hving during the fast the same as they do the
rest of the year. If they conform to the rules of the
Church, they fast by eating the most deHcate fish,
vegetables raised in hot houses and nourishing fruits
ripened by the heat of stoves.
Like the above Church we have also about the same
number of ceremonial days, for although the Bible
only commands us to keep one day in seven holy, the
Fasts and Feasts in the Table in our P. B. amount to
about two hundred. We boast of our P. B., but how
many of us are there who observe all those ceremonial
days?
To conclude : The fast of forty days arose in Baby-
lon. The Egyptians observed a fast of forty days in
honor of Osiris and the Romans held a forty nights
wailing for Proserpine. Humbolt tells us the Mexi-
cans three days after the vernal Equinox began a
solemn fast for forty days in honor of the sun. The
Yezidis of Koordistan still keep a fast of forty days
and we all know the Mahommedan Ramazan.
Froude says of the Roman Church, " The Church
forbade the eating of meat on fast days, but the
church was ready with dispensations for those who
could afford to pay for them. The Church forbade
marriage to the fourth degree of consanguinity, but
loving cousins, if they were rich and openhanded,
could obtain the church's consent to their union.
There were toll-gates for the priests at every halting-
place on the road of life — fees at weddings, fees at
funerals, fees wherever an excuse could be found to
fasten them. It was money — ever money. Even in
case of real delinquency, it was still money. Money,
not charity, covered the multitude of sins."
2o4 Lent.
Will it be believed that in the city of London they
at one time fasted on St Mark's Day on one side of the
street while they did not on tJie other, because forsooth
the Bishop of London had ordered the day to be ob-
served and the Archbishop of Canterbury had not !
In Pilkington's work, entitled Burnynge of Paules
ChurcJi, 1563, we read: "Although y\mbrose saye
that the churche knewe no fastinge day betwixt Easter
and Whitsonday, yet beside manye fastes in the Ro-
gation week, our wise popes of late yeares have de-
vysed a monstrous fast on St. Markes Daye. All
other fastinge daies are on the the holy day even, onl}^
Sainte Marke must have his day fasted. Tell us a
reason why so that you will not be laughen at. We
know wel ynough your reason of Tho. Beket, and
think you are ashamed of it ; tell us where it was de-
creed by the Church or Generall Counsel!. Tell us
also, if ye can, why the one sideof thestrete in Cheap-
side fastes that daye, being in London diocesse, and
the other side, being of Canterbury diocesse, fastes
not ? and so in many other townes moe. Could not
Beket's holynes reache over the streete or would he
not } If he could not he is not so mighty a saint as
ye make hym."
It is only since the leaven of Popery began to work
in our church, within the last half century, that some
of our clergy have annually on the arrival of Lent,
issued a notice that certain religious services would be
held during the season. Thus leading the people to
believe they should attend to their religious observ-
ances more during Lent than during the other months
of the year. Our reformers on the contrary, knowing
how the observance of Lent in Popish times had been
productive of superstition, denounced it, and would
not observe it.
Our good King Edward VI., in his proclamation
Lent. 205
about the observance of Lent in 1 548, said that he
minded not that his subjects should think there was
any difference in days or meats and that the one
should be to GOD more holy and pure than the other:
for all days and meats were of equal purity, and in
and by them we should live to the glory of GOD, and
Becon, Prebendary of Canterbury, in 1563, said
"Antichrist prescribeth certain days to be fasted,
yea, and that under pain of everlasting damnation,
as the time of Advent, Lent, embering days, saint's
eves, etc." Becon was a divine of great eminence and
dedicated his book to the Bishop of Chichester, and
he spoke truly in attributing it to Antichrist, for we
repeat there is no zvarrant m Scripture for investing
Lent with any special holiness or for making it a
time for special religious services.
Let a man lead a careless, worldly life for 325 days,
and then as the Romanists say do penance for forty
days, and this for a score of years in succession.
Should the angel of death then appear a day only be-
fore the next Lent, what the better would he be for his
previous twenty Lents ? And yet there are myriads
who think the old scores are wiped out and who im-
mediately open fresh ones, commencing often with a
display of new bonnets and the like, firmly believing
in the old proverb : —
" At Easter let your clothes be new,
Or else be sure you will it rue."
St. Paul did not say pray more at one season than
at another, but what he did say was, " Pray without
ceasing."
There are some good Protestants who think they
must eat fish on Wednesdays and Fridays. This was
really the law in England from the time of Queen
2o6 Lent
Elizabeth down to our own time. It was not a church
law, however, but a civil one, and was repealed by Act
of 31 and 32 Vict
After the blessed Reformation, when the people were
no longer obliged to eat fish, the government feared
the demand would decrease, and the fisheries, that
nursery for seamen and especially for sailors for the
Royal Navy, would decline, and for that reason and
" to reduce the high price of meat," orders were passed
from 1564 to 1579, enjoining the observance of the old
fast days, cJiangirig however the name to Fish days,
and one statute said that it is '* not for any supersti-
tion to be maintained in the choice of meats," and an-
other reads, " and the same is not required for any
liking for Popish ceremonies heretofore urged (which
utterly are detested), but only to maintain the marin-
ers and navy in this land by setting men afishing."
It is worthy of note that the Jews had only one
divinely appointed stated fast. This was the great
day of Expiation, appointed by the law of Moses, and
it was a fast of one day only. All the other fasts were
national ones, appointed at different times by the
authority of the state.
In the Ramazan the Mahommedan must fast from
about two hours before sunrise (when there is sufficient
light to distinguish plainly a white thread from a
black one) until sunset. They must abstain from eat-
ing, drinking, smoking, smelling perfumes, etc., and
even from intentionally swallowing their saliva. Their
years are lunar ones so that the Ramazan sometimes
falls in summer, when the abstinence from drinking is
most painfully felt.
What is our Lenten fasting compared to this, and if
as the Russians say, " Heaven is to be gained by fast-
ing," will not the followers of the false prophet be
there before us ?
Lent — Les soils. 207
There are no less than fifty-six hymns for Lent in
the Hymnal Companion. Can Bishop Bickersteth
find one single authority for this CHURCH fast in the
New Testament ?
Finally — may Christians fast ? Undoubtedly yes ;
but hardly as a matter of ceremony, nor at a set sea-
son. The Primitive Churches did not object to fasting
but considered it should be done of cJioice and not of
command. A Christian may be so overcome with sor-
row that, like King David, he will not care to eat, and
his fast is not then a matter of ceremony, but of will,
and in time of distress a whole nation also may fast as
did the Ninevites in the old dispensation.
It was a wise man who said, " Not forty days per
annum only, but the whole life of a Christian should
be a continual sacrifice to GOD, and the less said
about Fasts and Festivals the better." (See Coinmi-
nation and Fasting Communion.)
Lessons. Why, or through whose influence, did
the compilers of the New Lectionary, in i^ji, leave
out the Jjt/i and ijth chapters of the Revelation referr-
ing especially to the Church of Rome? The 13th,
moreover, contains the wonderful name of the beast !
Did they not fear the denunciation in the 19th verse
of the last chapter, and are not we ourselves guilty in
submitting quietly to this omission ?
Ten years later the Revised Version of the N. T.
appeared, and it was soon observed that the Revisors
had also tampered with that 13th chapter. In a note
to the number 666 they say " Some ancient authorities
read 616," and in reference to this "some," Dean
Burgon, who blamed Bishop Ellicott especially, said
(the italics are the Dean's) " But why is not the zvhole
Truth told ? viz., why are we not informed that only
one corrupt uncial (C) : — only one cursive copy (11) : —
2o8 LigJits — MaU'imony.
only one Father (Tichonius) : and not one ancient Ver-
sion — advocate this readinj^ ? — which, on the contrary
Irenaeus (A.D. 170) knew, but rejected; remarking
that 666, which is '' found in all the best and oldest
copies and is attested by men who saw John face to
face," is unquestionably the true reading ....
WJiy therefore — for what possible reason — at the end
of 1700 years and upwards, is this, which is so clearly
nothing else but an ancient slip of the pen, to be
forced upon the attention of 90 millions of English-
speaking people ? " We have no space for more, but
read Dean Burgon's Revision Revised, and his remarks
also on " Suppression systematically practised through-
out the work."
Lights. Using lighted Candles at the Communion
Table during the administration of the Holy Com-
munion, when such candles were not wanted for the
purpose of giving light, has been condemned by the
courts. (See Candles.)
Low Church. (See HigJi ajid Lozu Church)
Mark St. A Litany for St. Mark's day was insti-
tuted in 590 by the Church (i.e. Pope Gregory the
Great) as a substitute for the ancient Roman proces-
sions to propitiate the god or goddess Robigus or
Robigo — or Mildew, whose day was April 25th, just
before the Floralia. (See Invocation of Saints).
Matrimony. Some obvious parts of this service in
the P. B. should be omitted and the homily at the
conclusion either omitted or abbreviated, or at least
made optional, as it is in fact in practice.
The rubric says the persons " shall come in the body
of the Church." Why then is the ceremony performed
Mass — Mitre. ±o^
at the Chancel, the minister standing inside the rails ?
Is it to make it appear Hke one of the Romish Seven
Sacraments ?
Mass, instead of Lord's Supper. The Article say's
" The sacrifices of masses in which it was commonly
said that the priest did offer Christ for the quick and
the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were
blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits/'
The Abbe Malot expressing a doubt to Cardinal
Richelieu (who was a churchman of the Archbishop
Sheldon type) as to how many masses would save a
soul, the Cardinal replied, " Pho ! you are a blockhead !
As many as it would take snowballs to heat an oven."
Michael St This festival seems to have been
originally instituted in Rome about the year 500, and
was undoubtedly originally a heathen one. It is an old
English custom to eat roast goose on what the Roman
Church call Michaelmas. At the Oldman's Hospital,
Norwich, the custom of serving up roast goose ad
libitum on St. Michael's day has been observed since
the year 1249, and in a charter of Edward IV. (1471)
a tenant binds himself to furnish one goose fit for his
lord's dinner on the feast of St. Michael the Archangel.
The goose was sacrificed in Egypt to Seb, the father
of the gods, who was called The Great Cackler. It
was sacred also to Osiris and Isis, and in India to
Brahma, and we all know that it was the geese sacred
to Juno that saved the Capitol.
Mitre. Hook says the two horns of the mitre are
generally taken to be an illusion to the cloven tongues
of the fire which rested on each of the Apostles on the
day of Pentecost ! ! !
They are not horns, however, but the fish's head,
H
2IO
Mitre.
with the mouth open, seen in profile, of the priests of
On or Oannes, the Man of the Sea, the Fish-god,
worshipped by the Phih'stines as Dag On, the Fish
On, who was another form of Tammuz. These priests
were robed in the skin of the fish, the tail reaching
down behind to the ground, and the Fish-god appears
to have been portrayed in the same manner. One is
engraved in Smith and Cheetham's Christian Antiqui-
ties under " Fisherman," and absurdly called " The
Divine or Apostolic Fisher," but under " Ichthys " it is
styled " a monster ! ! ! "
Who shall decide when doctors disagree ?
Dean !5tanley it is true says the mitre is the same
as the cap or turban of the Eastern Church, and its
division into two points only marks the crease which is
the consequence of its having been like the opera-hat,
folded and carried under the arm. This will not be
understood by the present generation for the folding
hat went out of fashion half a century ago when Gibus
.invented the spring opera-hat. The Dean however
(and we regret to differ from him) gives no authority,
and it may be only an idea of his own ; but turbans (and
we have worn one in the East) are thick and solid and
would hardly fold as an opera-hat, and even if they
did would not split open. Let any one examine the
Fish-god, first engraved by Layard, and declare if he
can that the mitre is not the fish's head seen in profile
with the mouth open ?
And in connection with the pagan mitre it may be
added that Stanley says of the pagan divining rod or
modern pastoral staff that it is not the symbol of
priesthood against the state — nor even the crook of
the pastor over his flock, but simply the walking stick,
the staff of the old man, but here again we believe the
Dean is in error, for the crosier or pastoral staff of the
bishop is, as we have elsewhere stated, the lituns or
Mixed Chalice — Offertory Bags. 21 1
crooked divining rod of the Roman augurs and Chal-
dean priests, and was originally a slender rod about
two or three feet long.
Hook says the mitre has " fallen into utter disuetude
in England, even at coronations," and *' is now merely
an heraldic decoration." This was only in 1864. Un-
happily this relic of paganism has again been adopted
by many bishops of our church.
Mixed Chalice. This has been pronounced illegal
by the English Courts.
Non-Communicating' Attendance. (See Entire
congregation spectators at Mass.)
Offertory Bags. One of the so-called trifles, but
the old proverb says, " Many drops of water will sink
a ship."
The rubric says the " Deacons, Church-wardens or
other fit person shall receive the Alms in a decent
basin . . . and bring it to the priest who shall
. . . place it upon the holy Table," — but where is
the authority for the useless ceremony of emptying
those small basins into a larger one? We received
lately a circular from a church in the interior asking
for aid and stating they had already purchased a {q\w
articles, but among them was " a large alms-basin,"
and this in a place in the country so poor that the
offertory will probably be counted in cents rather than
dollars, and a twelvemonth's collection will not fill the
large basin.
According to the rubric, at the offertory the minis-
ter should say one or more sentences, and formerly
when the church was a large one we have heard the
whole of them read, but now one, or perhaps two, are
generally considered sufficient, but where is the auth-
2 1 1 Ordinal — Organs.
ority for taking up the collection with an organ ac-
companiment or an anthem for the entertainment of
the audience permitting the organist and the " offer-
tory soloist " as they are now styled, to display their
talents, instead of allowing the people to meditate upon
each sentence read?
Ordinal. The formula, " Whose sins thou dost
forgive they are forgiven, and whose sins thou dost
retain they are retained," is from the Romish ordinal
where, however, it never had any part in the ordina-
tion of ministers of the church for the first 1, 200 years
of Christendom, and has no connection with apostolic
times. It is utterly unknown in the Greek Church.
Org*ans. We laugh at our Scotch brethren for
their dislike to "squeaking abominations," but they
were found fault with in England as early as the
twelfth century.
Ethelred, an English author of high authority, and
a friend and contemporary of David the First, king of
Scotland (i 124-1 153), gives us the following minute
and curious account of the church music in his own
days : " Since all types and figures are now ceased,
why so many organs and cymbols in our churches ?
Why, I say, that terrible blowing of the bellow^s,
which rather imitates the frightsomeness of thunder
rather than the sweet harmony of the voice? For
w^hat end is this contraction and dilation of the voice.'*
One restrains his breath, another breaks his breath,
and a third unaccountably dilates his voice ; and
sometimes, I am ashamed to say, they fall a- quavering
like the neighing of horses. Next they lay down
their manly vigour, and with their voices endeavour to
imitate the softness of women. Sometimes you shall
see them with open mouths and their breath restrained
Organs — Orientalization of ClutrcJies. 213
as if they were expiring and not singing
And this ridiculous behaviour is called religion ; and
when these things are most frequently done, then GOD
is said to be most honourably worshipped." (^Ired,
Speculum Caritatis. Trans, by Pinkerton and quoted
in Tytler's Scotland).
At the time of the Reformation, organs were con-
sidered as amongst the vilest remnants of Popery by
all the more enthusiastic partizans of Protestantism,
and were so generally demolished that scarcely an
instrument could be found in England at the Restor-
ation ; and foreigners were brought over to play on
some of those that were erected. Among others, Lord
Bacon, who was not an extreme Puritan, objected to
them, and at the Convocation of 1562, the proposal
that organs should be removed was lost by a single
vote only.
The first organ built in New England was in 1745,
but they objected to have them in Meeting-houses as
the descendants of the Puritans then called their
churches. Now, however, (except in England, where
Non-conformists are considered to worship in chapels)
the word church has become the appropriate title for
all Christian places of worship, being simply the Greek
Kuriake, (in Scotch, Kirk), signifying the Lord's
house.
Orientalization of Churches. The continuing of
this Pagan custom, which was gradually becoming
obsolete, was one of the first things inculcated by
the notorious Cambridge Camden Society, more than
half a century ago. While other public buildings are
placed with their fronts on the streets, too many
churches, when on streets running east and west, are
built with one side on the street, the main entrance
214 Orioitalization of Churches — Paganism.
being thus on the west, with the Holy table, opposite
that entrance, \\ms> forcing the people to face the east, a
Romish custom derived from the Pagans, who wor-
shipped the sun in the east. The Temple, on the
contrary, stood from west to east, and had its sole
entrance at the east end, and Exekiel, 600 years B. C,
says of an abomination, " and behold at the door of
the Temple of the Lord. . . . were about five and
twenty men, with their backs towards the Temple of
the Lord, and their faces towards the east ; and they
worshipped the sun toward the east," and Pope Leo's
words prove that in the fifth century the Church of St.
Peter, in Rome, fronted the east, as in fact many
churches in Rome still do.
About the year 1 845, the Puseyites started a monthly
architectural review called the Ecclesiologist, the writers
in which labored hard to bring about the conforming
of our churches to the pre-Reformation type. Every
new church was criticized, and if the architect did not
agree with their views, he was lashed and ridiculed.
In this way architects were caught in the trammels of
the Puseyite party, and became in their turn its pro-
moters, by pressing their acquired views on the church-
building clergy and committees. (See East at the
recital of the Creed).
Paganism. As there are so many relics of Pagan-
ism still lingering among us is it not our duty to en-
deavour to unravel such of their mysteries as concern
ourselves? Besides which in the midst of their wonder-
fully incomprehensible tales faint reminiscences of the
truth continually crop up. Chrishna, for instance, the
Hindu Sun-god became at one and the same moment
the husband of sixteen thousand one hundred maidens
and at the same time multiplied himself that every
one of them thought he had married her in his single
Paganism. 215
person,* and yet he slew the Dragon or black snake
and is generally represented standing on a serpent
and crushing his head. Like the demi-god Achilles
he was invulnerable except in the heel and was acci-
dentally shot there with an arrow and killed.
The seed of the woman '' shall bruise thy head and
thou shalt bruise his heel." Gen. iii, 15.
Chronos or Saturn who offered up his only son in
sacrifice, bears in certain points a resemblance to
Abraham and this sacrifice as Jacob Bryant says is the
only sacrifice among the ancients which is termed
mystical.
The Egyptians even preserved the very day and
month that Noah entered into the ark ! We can only
suppose that the day may have been remembered as
an anniversary when all else was forgotten — like to the
Scotch and Irish who in all probability for at least
three thousand years have called All Saints' Eve, the
Night of Samhan (for Sanchoniathon who lived before
the Trojan war, says the Phoenicians worshipped the
Sun calling him Baal Samen which signifies Lord of
Heaven, but among the Greeks, Zeus or Jupiter) — or
like to ourselves who for more than twelve centuries
have kept the Feast of Astarte ignorantly believing
we are keeping the anniversary of the Resurrection.
Osiris after his death was shut up in his coffin or ark
which was set afloat upon the ivaters, as Plutarch says
'* on the seventeenth day of the month Athyr."
This was the second month after the autumnal equi-
nox, at which time the civil year of the Jews and of
the patriarchs also began. He remained in his float-
*One would think the even 16,000 would have been sufficient with-
out the equally inexplicable additional one hundred. The number six-
teen is, however, an important division in India. Money, weights and
measures, etc., are divided m\.o a7inas or sixteenths, and in conversation
it is the usual expletive of quantity.
2l6 Pas^anisni
ing coffin a whole year, until he was resuscitated by
the prayers of his wife Isis.
And what do we read in Genesis — " In the second
viontJi on the sevejitee7ith day of the month ....
Noah entered into the ark ! "
Fearing that we may tire the reader, we will be as
brief as possible, but must add that our Classical Dic-
tionaries give long accounts of Janus, but we do not
remember ever having seen in any of them that he
was mixed up wdth Cannes, the Fish-god, or the Rain-
god, or Noah, who, as Hyslop shows, was called in
the Babylonian mysteries the twice-born, as having
lived in two worlds, both before the flood and after it,
and was represented with tw^o heads looking in oppo-
site directions, the one old and bearded and the other
young.
The Pagans, however, did not know whom they
worshipped, the names, sobriquets or titles of their
deities being either frequently corrupted, as in the case
of Astarte and Easter, or translated or changed as when
in Britain Tammuz the Sun-god was also worshipped
under the Celtic name of Gran, Grian, Gwrant and
Granwyn, signifying the Shining One or the Shiner,
and down to our own day libations of milk were made
to him on his day, Sun day, in the remote Highlands
in hollow stones called granni stones, of which there
was one in every village. In relation to which it must
not be forgotten that the sun and the serpent were
one god, and Glaus Magnus (A.D. 1555) tells us that
in the extreme parts of Northern Europe serpents
were considered as Jiousehold gods, and fed on milk
with the children, and even to this day in some parts
of India women pour milk into the snake-holes.
Virgil calls the Grecian Sun-god Apollo Gryneus.
The Britons called the Cam, Grant, and when a bridge
was built, their successors the Saxons called it Granta-
Paganism. 2 1 7
bryg — now Cambridge, and Caer Gwrant, or Graunt-
sethe, became Granchester. The Grampians, anciently
Granzebene, are Grian's hills. (See Cross^
The confusion is inextricable. Ra, the sun, whicn
with the definite article becomes Phra, which appears
in the official name of Pharaoh, is invoked under
seventy-five different names. Bacchus was called the
many-named. Odin had two hundred names.*
The Book of the Dead has a chapter entirely con-
sisting of the names of Osiris, and as we are obliged
to repeat, which is often necessary in a Dictionary,
Isis is called Myrionyma, or the goddess of Ten thou-
sand names.
Their wise men believed that there was but one
Supreme and Only GOD, and it was to this Unknown
God that the altar found by St. Paul was dedicated.
About the year 53, Paul said, "Ye men of Athens
. . . I found an altar with this inscription To THE
UNKNOWN God."
More than four centuries before this, Herodotus
wrote that there was one tribe of the Pelasgi (the most
ancient inhabitants of Greece) who had no images and
worshipped One Supreme GoD whose name they never
pronounced.
In Egypt they believed in an only true living GOD,
self-originated, who existed from the beginning, who
had made all things but had not Himself been made,
who had no name, or if He had it was unlawful to
pronounce or write it. Even Amen, the hidden or
concealed god, did not nearly approach Him, and
when they worshipped their various gods they believed
their prayers were addressed to that Supreme GoD
under some one of His forms or in some one of His
*Bacchus was the god of wine, and Odin lived on wine, Odin had
but one eye, and that eye was the sun,
2iS P(ii^aiiis/n.
aspects.* As the late M. de Rouge says, " One idea
predominates, that of a single and primeval GOD ;
everywhere and always it is One Substance, self-ex-
istant, and an unapproachable GOD."
Even in Scandinavia they had a Supreme GOD
whom the Elder Edda dares not name :
" Yet there shall come
Another mightier,
Altho' Him
I dare not name."
The younj^er Edda once calls him Alfadur — Father
of all. He was before the beginning of time and at
the end of time He enters upon His eternal reign,
and is to be the judge in the day of judgm.ent.
In South America it was the same also, even on the
Pacific side, far enough from Scandinavia. De Na-
daillac in ]\\s Pre-historic America says, "The Peru-
vian priests taught the existence of a supreme GOD, a
Detis ignotus{\}r\Vx\oyNn God), to whom no temple was
dedicated and whose image none were permitted to
make," and in Squier's Peru, w^e read, " But, above all
and beyond all, above and beyond the worship of
ancestors and Jiuacas (household gods), spirits of sea
and land, and the powers or nature, they probably
adored the original pure, incorporeal essence, the un-
created Pachacamac,-|- not with noisy and fantastic
rites and sacrifices, but 'in their hearts,' in silence and
in awe. We cannot deny the prevalence of this
*Lenormant, Wilkinson, Rawlinson, LePage Renouf, George Smith,
Sayce, and others.
tElsevvhere he says Pachacamac had a shrine at the sacred city of the
same name, which signified, " lie who animates the universe," "The
Creator of the world," and that from his incomprehensibility he was not
represented by any figure in this temple.
Paganism 219
spiritual worship among all, or nearly all, the nations
of the coast, without discrediting the authorities that
have reached us bearing on the subject."
As the worship of the serpent in every part of the
world was derived from a corrupted tradition of the
serpent of Paradise, was not this also derived from an
all but lost tradition of the ineffable name of the GOD
of Israel, which was not known even to Abraham
(Exodus, 6, 3), and is it not another of the many
proofs we are continually finding as we delve deeper
into ancient history of the authenticity of the Bible ?
In the Orphic Hymns the Greeks sang to the uni-
versal Zeus, the Greek name of Jupiter,— â–
" Zeus is the male
Zeus is the immortal female."
and Arnobius tells us others prayed " Oh Baal, whether
thou be a god or goddess hear us."
Plutarch says the Egyptians called the moon the
mother of the world and assigned to her a nature both
male and female.
We read in our Classical Dictionaries that Bacchus,
Adonis, Silenus, Priapus and the Satyrs were all men
and Vesta, Rhea, Ceres, Proserpine and Themis were
women, and yet Porphyry, a Pagan philosopher, tells
us they were all one and the same and this is attested
in the Orphic Hymns, while others went still farther
and believed all the gods and goddesses were included
in that One Supreme Deity of whom we have spoken.
The Hindu Chrishna says " I am Vishnu, Brahma,
Indra, and the source as well as the destruction of all
things."
There are many superstitions connected with the
hare, and even now in P^ngland there are numbers
who consider it unlucky if a hare crosses their path,
and it is in some places the same with the rabbit, lor
Tylor in his Primitive Culture, says " The Cornish
220 Paganism.
miner turnsaway in horror when he meetsan old woman
or a rabbit on his way to the pit's mouth," and Brand
\nh.\s Antiquities, among "Various Vulgar Errors"
says " There is a vulgar error that the hare is one
year a male and the other a female. This deserves
no serious consideration."
Here, however, that learned author is at fault, as on
the contrary we are confident this undoubtedly ex-
ceedingly ancient proverb is really deserving of very
serious consideration, for the N. A. Indians worship
the Great Hare or Rabbit, and this proverb tends to
show that he was also anciently worshipped in Britain
as a god orgoddess,maleorfemale they knew notwhich,
Does not all this prove that the ancients believed that
the Great Founder of the Universe was of no sex but
an Almighty Spirit ? Does it not agree with Holy
Writ where we are led to believe that the heavenly
beings are sexless. " In the ressurrection they neither
marry nor are given in marriage, hut are as the angels
in heaven." Matt, xxii, 30.
The N. A. Indians tell us wonderful stories of
Manibozho or Michabo, the Great Hare or Rabbit,*
whom many of them look upon as their common
ancestor, who created the earth and also the sun and
moon, while others call him the grandson of the moon.
He dwells in the sky with his brother the snow, while
others say his wigwam is in the far north, and still
others believe he dwells at the edge of the earth where
the sun rises. The thunder and lightning are his and
with them he destroys his enemies, and like as the
Egyptian Horus pierced the serpent's head with a
spear, and Cadmus slew the sacred serpent at Thebes,
the Grecian Apollo slew the serpent Python with his
arrow, the Hindu Chrishna slew the Dragon or Black
*There are no hares in America, but both hares and rabbits are of
the genus I.epiis.
Paganism. 22 1
Snake Kallnak, the Scandinavian Thor killed the
Midgard or world serpent, the Mexican Teotl crushed
the serpent, and the English George* killed the
Dragon, so also the Great Hare killed the shining
Prince of Serpents with his dart.
And all this of that insignificant, timid, little
animal ? Who can explain it ?
In Germany it must have been connected with the
moon, for at Easter they make nests, fill them with
Easter eggs and cover each egg with a rabbit made
of dough and baked, but called Oster Jiase, Easter
hare. In Hungary it is considered an ill omen if a
hare crosses the path. In India the hare is connected
with the moon. In China it is looked upon as a
divine animal. Caesar said the Britons made use of
hares for the purpose of divination. In Mongol stories
the moon appears under the emblem of a hare. They
are to be found on the most ancient monuments in the
Caucasus. It was one of the Akkadian gods and was
also an Egyptian god under the name of Un, but then
it was considered the rising sun. Conder {^Asiatic
HieroglypJis) says " We have a cylinder from Cappa-
docia showing the gods standing on various animals —
just as the Hindu gods are represented — and one of
the animals is a hare." It was the emblem of that
ancient race, the Hittites, but stranger still (except as
some believe, that the Hottentots like the Akkadians
belong to the Turanian race), in South Africa, almost
the very antipodes of the N. A. Indians, the miserable
Hottentots believe that the hare is the servant of the
moon.
It may appear incomprehensible that so small an
animal should have been worshipped, but Osiris, the
*Banng-Gould thinks George was a Christianized Tanimuz. See
In7>ocation of Saints.
222 Paganism.
greatest of the Egyptian deities was sometimes adored
as the Cat, and mummy cats abound. In the Book
of the Dead he himself says " I am the Great Cat."
In Germany too we find the confusion of sexes, for
Astarte or Easter was the Moon-god there, and the
consort of the '^wx\-goddess, for in the ancient Teutonic
languages the moon is of the masculine gender and
the sun feminine, and it was formerly customary in
some parts of Germany to pay them proper respect
by calling them Mr. Moon and Mrs. Sun.
Whence sprang this but from that one common
centre, Babylon, "which hath made all the earth
drunken."
The sun was worshipped as the Serpent-Sun-god,
and here again is obscurity, for some chief deity we
may safely say everywhere, bruises the serpent's head,
and yet also everywhere the serpent is adored, and
snakes are still considered sacred in many places.
Was this from fear and from a reminiscence of the
latter part of the solemn prediction that the serpent
should bruise the heel of the seed of the woman ?
The act of devotion having been continued long after
its origin was forgotten ?
As names and attributes were so constantly changed
and the serpent was often transformed into a dragon,
may he not also have been metamorphosed into a
boar ?
Osiris was slain by Typhon, a monster represented
in the shape of a boar, who cut up his body into
several pieces and threw them into the sea, but Isis
collected all that she could, joined them together with
wax and shut them up in a coffin or ark which she
set afloat upon the waters ivJiere it remained one year
until he revived !
Noah was one year in the ark ! ! !
As Adonis Tammuz was the beautiful huntsman.
Pao^anisin. 223
He also was killed by the tusk of a wild boar which
he had wounded — perhaps mortally †” thus bruising
the head and the heel. This boar may have also
been a monster — perhaps a dragon — for these myths
abound with inconsistencies. To cut up the body of
Osiris required a knife. Could a boar use one — and
yet the Great Hare used a dart.
Women bewailed him. Diarmad likewise killed a
boar and was himself killed by the animal.
Our fellow-countrymen must not be passed over.
The white-toothed Diarmad was the beautiful hunts-
man He had a beauty spot which no woman could
resist. He slew an enormous boar, and to measure
its length walked over the dead body and then to
measure it again walked back against the hair and
was killed by a bristle which pierced his foot, for
as Achilles and Chrishna were invulnerable, except
in the heel, so Diarmad was invulnerable except in
the sole of his foot. The women bewailed him.
"Women all mourn," says Ossian, in the M. S. copy
made by the Dean of Lismore, two centuries before
Macpherson was falsely charged with having forged
those works.
The great temple in Britanny is built in the form
of a serpent, moving over the ground and following
its windings is eight miles long. It is called Carnac,
i. e. the serpent's cairn, Jiac being a Celtic word and
snakes are still called hag-\vox\xi^ in the North of
England. Some of the columns are eighteen feet
high, and the largest is forty-two feet in circum-
ference.
Fancy a procession of Pagan priests and their fol-
lowers with garlands, banners, and we must add im-
pure emblems, winding through these lines, as they
are called, for eight miles, and think of the absurdity
224 Paganism.
of a procession through the aisles of a little parish
church !
There was a similar serpent suntemple of the same
length in Westmoreland, though the stones were not
as large.
There is a column at Lochmariaker, in Britanny,
originally seventy feet in height with perhaps ten
feet under ground, but it is now overturned and broken
into four pieces, and in Cornwall there is a greal dol-
men or stone table, the slab of which, raised upon
two rocks, measures about forty feet long by twenty
wide and sixteen thick and Vv^eighs about seven hun-
dred tons.
These are all of rough, unhewn stones, but can any
one suppose for a moment that the builders of these
wonderful monuments could not have finished them
as perfectly as the Egyptian temples ? If all else was
forgotten, however, there still remained, " And if thou
wilt make me an altar of stone thou shalt not build it
of hewn stone : for if thou lift up thy tool upon it thou
hast polluted it !
At Stonehenge there is a huge stone in a sloping
position called by the people the pointer. It is at
some distance from the avenue of the temple but in a
direct line with its centre and the axis of the avenue
accurately coincides with the sun's rising at the sum-
mer .solstice. When standing in a certain position
on midsummer morning the sun as it rises appears
actually to rest like a huge ball on this isolated stone,
and there is another line laid down which coincides
with the setting of the sun at the winter solstice.
That this was a sun temple is beyond dispute.
Midsummer was the day called in the Babylonian
Calendar the first day of the month of Tammuz, and
on \}ciQ first day of that month, that is on or about the
24th of June, a great festival of Tammuz was cele
Paganism — Painted Windozvs. 225
brated, and it was maintained until the sixth century
when the Roman Church, finding the people would
not give it up, incorporated it as a sacred Christian
festival in the Roman Calendar and as one of the
names of Tammuz was Cannes, very similar to the
Latin Johannes or John, they called it St John the
Baptist's day. In the east the day began in the
evening, and to this day fires are made on St. John's
Eye, that is on the evening of the 23rd, in Ireland,
France, and other R. C. countries.
The winter solstice was the day on which the Ara-
bians considered their great divinity the Lord Moon
was born. In Babylon the day was sacred to Bac-
chus, and in Rome to Saturn, and as Tammuz was
killed by a wild boar the animal was sacrificed to him
on that day. It formed the principal dish at the feast
of Saturn, and is still .served up at dinner on Christ-
mas Day at Windsor Castle. (See Tannnnz).
Painted Windows There is not a single passage
in the N. T. warranting the use of paintings or images,
and in the Injunctions of 1559 it is ordered '• to take
away, utterly extinct, and destroy all . . . pic-
tures, paintings ... so that there remain no
memory of the same in walls, glass windozvs, or else-
where within their churches or houses " and one of the
Homilies says that to set up images in " places ap-
pointed peculiarly to the service of GOD, is to make
images to the use of religion, and not only against this
precept ' Thou shalt make no manner of image,' but
against this also ' Thou shalt not bow down to them
nor worship them,' for they having been so set up,
have been, be, and ever will be worshipped," and the
judgment of the Ridsdale crucifix case in 1877 agrees
with this •' it is hard not to distrust the uses to which
15
226 Painted Windou's.
it ma}' come to be put, or escape the apprehension that
what begins in ' decoration ' 7nay end in ' idolatry! "
The employment of art — the gradual substitution of
sensuous helps for spiritual worship — was emphatically
denounced as idolatry by Tertullian and the energetic
action of Epiphanius in tearing down the pictures in
churches was approved by Jerome, Origen, Lactantius,
Athanasius and Cyril. Bernard of Clairvaux said,
" The beautiful is more admired than the sacred is
revered," and of painted windows an old friend, the
Rev. Mourant Brock, late of Clifton, wrote, " They
sometimes fascinate my imagination to the injury of
devotion, and more frequently offend my taste."
Count Krasinski said " It was replacing intellect by
sight. Instead of elevating man toward GOD it was
bringing down the Deity to the level of his finite
intellect." Alfred Vaughan says " the introduction of
art into religion ends not by art becoming religious,
but by religion becoming an art."
Ruskin's words are " One great fact first meets me.
I never met with a Christian man whose heart was
thoroughly set upon the world to come, and, so far as
human judgment could pronounce, perfect and right
before GoD, who cared about art at all," and of painted
windows he said " A picture in painted glass is one
of the most vulgar of barbarisms and only fit to be
ranked with the gauze transparencies and chemical
illuminations of the sensational stage."
Is it to be supposed for an instant that the vast
multitude regard these charming saints and lovely
saintesses with feelings of reverence only ? Is the
famous St. Sebastian forgotten, with whom half the
women in Florence, noble and simple, fell in love,
some it is said even became crazy. It only differed
from an Apollo Belvidere in being pierced with arrows.
Fra Bartolomco, as Symonds says " painted a Sebas-
Painted Windows. 227
tian in the cloister of St. Marco, where it remained
until the Dominican Confessors became aware through
the avowals of female penitents that the picture was
a stumbling block and a snare to souls. It was then
removed.
On a tomb in St. Peter's Church, Rome, is a white
marble semi-colossal recumbent figure of an angel,
so beautiful that a modern Pygmaleon, a Spaniard, fell
in love with it, and as Murray says " circumstances
occurred to render drapery necessary ; the present
bronze robes were therefore added." We saw this
statue in 1839, when a boy, and very strange the
sheet apeared. It was apparently very thin brass and
shining as if it was lacquered, so that it could be
noticed from a distance. We had almost forgotten it
but during our last visit to Rome, four years ago, it
suddenly occurred to us as singular that we had not
noticed it, and wondering if it had been removed, for
we have seen many changes in Italy, we went there
again and soon found what we thought was the tomb
but the shining sheet had disappeared. Curiously
enough while looking at it, two men, apparently
Germans, stopped near us and after both looking over
their guide book, one of them walked up to the statue
and tapped the drapery with his knuckles. The sound
was enough. The brass sheet had been painted white
to represent marble.
Carlisle said : " I dislike all pictures of Christ ; you
will find that men never thought of painting Christ till
they had begun to lose the impression of him in their
hearts."
The Mohammedans always despised the Roman
Catholics for their sculptured and painted images, but
now according to the English Chnrc/wmn, quasi-
idolatry is carried to such an extent in some English
Churches in India, that the natives laugh the English
228 Painted Windows.
religion to scorn as being merely one form of idol-
worship trying to supplant another, and even the Jew
looks into our churches and says " These Christians are
idolaters."
Laud was the first who introduced painted images
into the church of the Reformation, and in our day
we see an unhappy revival originated by the Ritualists
who understood the necessity of darkening the
churches and especially the chancels, to make the
light of the candles more effective. One of the prin-
ciple charges against Laud at his trial in 1644, was
" Painted Windows in the chapel at Lambeth," in
several of which GOD THE FATHER was blasphemous-
ly represented,
It is not alone painted windows with figures that
should not be overlooked. Notice the lozenge shaped
panes in not only our own but in other Churches
filled alternately with Dr. Pusey's ornamented crosses
and lilies. Ask an educated Romanist and he will
reply they are the emblems of the Blessed Virgin (for
he will probably name her first) and of the Saviour.
He has no second Commandment, as that is generally
left out of the R.C. Books of Devotion, but we know and
should remember that Commandment forbids all em-
blems for the use of religion. The lotus or water-lily
in Egypt and elsewhere the lily was sacred to the
Egyptian goddess Isis, and when her worship was
transferred to the Virgin Mary the flower was retained
and is still sacred to the Virgin in the Roman Church.
Too often these and other matters are considered
minor details to be left to the architects.
And should our houses be neglected ? We ourselves
Jiad a Madonna della Seggiola which we could not
bear to part with as it was not only a good copy but
an heirloom, but when a Roman Catholic friend, as
she crossed herself and expressed her pleasure in see-
Pastoral Staff— Prayer-Book. 229
ing it in our house, we employed an artist (at the risk
of being called a goth or a bigot) to paint out the
halos and the tiny cross, and we have now what
Raphael really painted in the country on the head of
a wine-cask, an Italian woman and her two babes.
A friend of ours was in Oxford when Holman
Hunt's "Light of the World" first appeared, and
while his brother Oxonians were in ecstacies, our
Reverend friend said "If a stable lantern is necessary
to show that our Lord is the Light of the w^orld I will
keep a lump of rock salt on my study table to show
that I am one of the Salt of the Earth."
Pastoral Staff. This like the mitre is of pagan
origin. It is the lituus or shepherd's crook of the
Roman augurs. The Chaldean soothsayers and priests
also had a crook or crosier as their divining rod in the
performance of their magic rites. They were then
about two or three feet long.
The crosier of Severinus, bishop of Cologne, (died
A.D. 400), served him as a walking-stick. Gregory
the Great, A.D. 590, is represented in an ancient
illumination as holding one about two or three feet
long with a lily at the end, and in another is portrayed
holding a long staff with a Maltese cross at the top.
The Pope even now only carries a small silver
crosier. The crosier or pastoral staff of a Roman
Archbishop terminates in a cross, while the pastoral
staff of a bishop ends in an ornamental crook.
Pastoral staffs were abolished at the Reformation,
and although mentioned in the First Book of Edward
VI., are entirely omitted in the Second Book of 1552,
and yet they have been re-introduced in the last few
years ! (See Mitre?)
Prayep-Book. The Reformation under Edward
VI. was never completed. Cranmer meditated further
:2 30 Prayer- Book.
measures, but the king died and Bloody Mary sent
the Reformer to the stake. Our P. B. has undergone
five revisions, the first book of Edward, that ot 1549,
being a wonderful work considering that it was com-
posed by men who had most of their lives, held and
advocated the doctrines of Rome, but a great advance
was made by the Reformers in the next three years,
as evidenced by the second book completed in 1552.
This is the best P. B. the English Church has produced
and is far better than the one now in use. It was,
however, still imperfect and had Edward lived a few
years longer there would have been a more complete
revision, for Alasco tells us that the king and his
council were anxious to effect a far more thorough
and extensive Reformation of the Church of England.
Elizabeth, who was religiously a Romanist, but
politically a Protestant, unprotestantized the P. B.
(even in opposition to the commissioners she had her-
self appointed to draw it up) to make it acceptable
to Romanists, and when a copy of it was sent to the
Pope he was so well satisfied with it that he offered
through his nuncio Parpalia, to ratify it for England,
if the Queen would only acknowledge the supremacy
of Rome, and for some years after the papists repaired
to the parish churches.
Mary had restored the old Mass-book but so accept-
able did Elizabeth make her P. B. to the clergy that
of the 9,400 ministers who had served under Mary
and conformed to Popery, all remained at their posts
and used the P.B., with the exception of 200 only.
Not one in forty, as Burnet tells us, refused to con-
form.
An important clause struck out of the Articles in
1^21izabeth's time is referred to under Real Presence.
The P^ourth Revision took place under James the
P^irst, at the Hampton Court Conference in 1604. The
Prayer- Book. 2 3 1
changes were not numerous but still in the same direc-
tion of sacramentarianism. The king was bitterly-
opposed to the Puritans. Turning to the bishops he
said, '' I will make them conform, or I will harry them
out of the land, or else worse." ..." only hang
them ; that's all." In defiance of the authority of
Parliament he added the words, " verily and indeed
taken and received " word for word from the Romish
Mass Book.
At the end of the Conference the aged Archbishop
Whitgift said, " Your majesty speaks by the special
assistance of God's spirit," and Bancroft, then Bishop
of London, oji his knees, exclaimed that his heart
melted for joy, " because GOD had given England such
a king as since Christ's time had not been," and the
bishop soon received the reward he was looking for,
that is to say the earthly reivard, for Whitgift died a
few weeks after and Bancroft was made Archbishop.
Our present P. B., the fifth revision, was made in
the reign and by the tools of Charles the Second, a
Roman Catholic, who entered into a secret alliance
with the king of France for the purpose of restoring
the Roman Catholic religion in England, and was a
pensioner of King Louis after he ascended the British
throne.
Archbishop Sheldon was the principal revisor, and
Bishop Burnet says, " he seemed not to have a deep
sense of religion, if any at all^ and commonly spoke
of it as an engine of government and as a matter of
policy," and the Rev. D. Mountfield, Rector of New-
port, Salop, says, " his ruling passion was detestation
of the Puritans, whom he considered plagues and pests
of the church." He was, moreover, as unchaste as
his king. Pepys refers to it in his '' Diary " in words
not fit to be copied here.
It was only a year before this revision that Pepys
2^2 Prayer- Book.
complained tliat the bishops were " so high," and
Evelyn says about the same time of Cosin, " I saluted
the old Bishop of Durham, Dr. Cosin, to whom I had
been kind and assisted in his exile ; but which Jie little
rentCDibcred in his greatnessP
It is due to Sheldon and his friends, as the controll-
ing spirit of the Revision Committee, that we are still
admitted into the church with the false Romish dogma,
of Regeneration by Baptism, or Salvation by Baptism
and with a false creed, for while Paul says, " It is
raised a spiritual body," our sponsors answer for us
that we believe in the resurrection of the flesh.
We blame the Romanists for using the so-called
" Holy Water," and yet we pretend to use it ourselves
— '* Sanctify this water." This clause which was ex-
cluded from the Second Book of 1552 was restored in
1662, although the puritans protested against it as it
endorsed the doctrine of transelementation.
Other suggestions were treated with like contempt,
not only in the Communion Service, but even where
both parties might seem to have agreed, as for instance
in the Litany, where the Puritans desired the prayer
against sudden death should be changed to " From
dying suddenly and unprepared" — but it wes denied.
King Charles called upon all the clergy to subscribe
to his book, but upwards of two thousand, or about
oneflfth of the clergy of that day had conscience
enough to refuse to do so and were driven from their
pulpits.
While some in this and the previous reigns of whom
it may be said that they interpreted the P. B. by
the second book of Edward, and became gradually
known as Low Churchmen, others who could not
draw that distinction were driven out and forced as it
were to become Presbyterians, Congregational ists,
Baptists, etc.
Prayer- Bo ok . 233
In the reign of William the Third, in 1689, the P. B.
was again revised. The Committee consisted of ten
bishops and twenty divines, all eminent for their
learning and piety. This P. B., revised by Evangelical
Protestants, was encouraged by the king, but as a vast
majority of the clergy were semi-papists (made so by
King Charles' P. B.) they rejected this Revision and it
was never proposed to Convocation.
After the American Revolution a change became
necessary in the United States and a revised P. B. was
issued in 1785, but was only used four years until 1789
when the present P. B. appeared. The principal re-
viser was Bishop Seabury who was a Sacerdotalist
and to his influence is due the approximation of the
Communion Office to that of the Scotch Episcopal
Church.
Of the two prayers in the Communion Service after
all have communicated, Seabury (for it was probably
by his instigation) left out the first which Sacerdotalists
will not read, as it contains the words "our sacrifice of
praise and thanksgiving" but retained the second in
which occur the words " holy mysteries " which in the
Revised P. B. is "holy ordinance" and in the R. E.
Books is " holy supper."
They retained those fasts of the Roman Church of
the Dark Ages, Ember-days and Rogations, and in
the American Protestant Episcopal Almanac (New
York, t86i) for the month of May we read : —
4-
5-
6.
7.
8.
Mo.
Tu.
W.
Th.
Fri.
Rogation D:iy. — Fast.
Rogation Day. — Fast.
Rogation Day. — Fast.
Ascension Day.
Fast.
5.
Fri.*
Fast.
:>34 Prayer- Book.
20. W. Ember-Day. — Fast.
21. Th.
22. Fri. Ember-Day. — Fast.
23. Sat. Ember-Day. — Fast.
Including Lent, etc., there are nearly ninety Fasts
and about eighty Feasts. Together one hundred and
sixty or nearly one half of the year to be religiously
observed by Feasting or fasting. All tending to de-
tract from the Lord's Day.
Is there any authority for this in the N. T. ? If so,
where ?
Within the last few years we have had the Prayer-
Books of the P. B. Revision Society first published in
England in i860, and used by the Free Church ; of the
Reformed Episcopal Church of England, and of the
R. P2. Churches of the U. S. A. and Canada, (the prin-
cipal difference in these two being in the prayers for
the President and the Queen, etc.) all of which are
preferable to the P. B. of the Church of Ireland pub-
lished in 1878. Besides these are the private revised
ones, one of which printed for a gentleman in England
for the use of his family, was sent to us a score of
years since.
The Revised P. B. of the Reformed Spanish Church,
Madrid, 1889, has just appeared. Although not free
from imperfections, the Minister is to stand behind the
Table facing the people, and this is said to be in
accordance with the ancient Mozarabic usage, called
also the Isidorian, the Gothic or the Toledan Rite,
which use yielded its position against the will of the
people to the Roman Rite in the eleventh century.
To the Form used instead of our Absolution in Morn-
ing Prayer the people reply, craving a like blessing on
the Minister (see Absolution). There is no " form of
indicative absolution " in the Visitation of the Sick,
Prayer-Book — Preparation for Communion. 235
nor commission to remit or retain sins in the Ordinal.
The Laws of Solon were enacted to continue in force
for one htmdred years only, but we are still satisfied
with our P. B. of 1692. That truly Christian man,
Bishop Baring, in his charge in i860, characterized
the Act of 1692 as one " disastrous in its consequences
as it was cruel in its intentions," and it was stated by
Neal that if the alterations then recommended had been
adopted it would in all probability have brought in
three parts out of four of the Nonconformists."
Sidney Smith said, " What human plan, device or
invention, 200 years old, does not require rcconsidera-
•tion } If a man dressed now as his forefathers dressed
200 years ago, the pug dogs in the streets would tear
him in pieces. If he lived in the houses of 200 years
ago, unrevised and uncorrected, he would die of rheu-
matism in a week. If he listened to the sermons of
200 years ago he would perish with sadness and
fatigue ; and when man cannot make a coat or a
cheese for years together without making them better,
can it be said that laws made in those days of ignor-
ance, ajid framed in tJie fury of religious hatred, need
no revision, and are capable of no amendment? "
Prepapation for Communion. The Rev. Mour-
ant Brock, in his Short Chapters on the Sacrament
(London, 1883) says, " ' A week's preparation ;' who
was the inventor of that ? * A fond thing,' we may
add, ' and without sure warranty of Scripture.' * A
week's preparation ! ' And, what then ? The Com-
munion, of course. And then } Another ' Prepara-
tion,' and again the Communion. And so your life is
spent in preparing for the Communion ! "
" Is this, do you suppose, according to the mind of
God ? Has He in His Holy Word set no higher
object before you than preparation for the Holy
2;^6 Preparation for Coinmunion — Presbyter.
Communion ? He has — He has bid you, prepare for
eternity. He has told you ' to gird your loins and
trim your lamps, and to be as men ivJio wait for their
Lord! Here is the 'preparation' to which, as Christians,
we are called — not to a * week's preparation,' but to a
lifes preparation. Not to a preparation for the Holy
Supper, but to a preparation for the coming of Christ.
The Supper itself is to be a preparation for this and
subservient to it "
" If made meet for His Kingdom in heaven, how
much more prepared for His Table on earth ! "
Must not the lesser be included in the greater ?
To the end, therefore, even to the Coming of the
Lord, let us be looking, and not to the Holy Supper,
which is only a temporary and shadowy Institution."
PpesbyteF. Bishops and presbyters were identical
in the early church and were carefully distinguished
from the deacons, the second order of the clergy.
They of the first order are sometimes denominated
presbyters or elders, sometimes bishops, and then
again bishops and presbyters indiscriminately. There
was no divine right of priesthood, and the Apostles
allowed the people to make their own election, and
there are on record instances where the people of their
own accord and by acclamation elected their own
bishops or presbyters. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage,
was so elected A.D. 248 ; Cornelius, Bishop of Rome in
251 ; Eustathius, Bishop of Antioch in 310; Athana-
sius. Bishop of Alexandria in 325 ; Ambrose, Bishop of
Milan in 374 ; Martin, Bishop of Tours in 375 ; Chry-
sostom, Bishop of Constantinople in 398 ; and Eura-
clius of Hippo, and Miletus of Antioch.
Cyprian even apologized to his people for appoint-
ing one Auretius to the office of reader on account of
Presbyter. 237
the necessity of the case and without consulting them
as he was wont to do.
The first bishops were bishops of parishes^ not dio-
ceses, a word of later introduction, and were in fact
parish ministers or overseers of their little flocks, and
one of them on record was an army chaplain. As we
have already shown (see Bishops) the Dean of Canter-
bury calls them incumbents. Ignatius exhorted Poly-
carp, Bishop of Smyrna, to know all his flock by name,
even the men-servants and maid-servants and to suffer
nothing to escape his notice. This might have been
done in a parish, but not in a diocese. Cyprian made
it a duty to have a familiar acquaintance with all his
flock. Du Pin drew up a list oi six hundred and ninety
bishoprics in Africa, one of which was only a fort, so
that this bishop was only what ive zvould nozv call an
army chaplain I More proofs might be given, but we
think this is sufficient to show that the primitive
bishops were identical with presbyters, and that they
were elected by the people.
Why was the word " suffrages " {cheironto7iesa7ites)
omitted in Acts xiv., 23 ? Was it accidental, or, re-
membering Bancroft's change of in to at (see Bowing
in the Creed), as he propounded the doctrine of the
divine origin of Episcopacy, we cannot help wondering
whether it was intentional, to conceal from the people
the rights they anciently possessed.
In the Authorized Version we read : '* And when
they had ordained them elders in every church."
Tyndale, however, says : " And when they had
ordened them seniours by eleccion in every congrega-
tion," and at least three foreign non-episcopal Bibles
agree with him, viz., the French, " Et apres que par
I 'avis des asseniblces " (by the vote of the congrega-
tion) ; the Dutch, " En als zij hun in elke gemeente,
met opsteken der handen " (by holding up their hands) ;
238 Presbyter — Priest.
and the Italian, " E dopo che ebbero loco per ciascuna
chiesa ordinati per voti comiini " (by publie vote).
The Revised Version agrees with the Authorized.
In the next chapter of the Revised Version is also
a strange error. " The apostles and the elder brethren "
(Acts XV, 23), the Revisors having here created a new
order of Lay elders ! In verses 2, 4, 6, and 22 the
Greek word " Prcsbuteroi " is rendered " elders " and
why was it translated otherwise in verse 23 ?
It is correctly rendered in the A. V. " Apostles and
elders and brethren," which agrees with the Dutch
Bible (A. V. 1637) "The Apostles and the Elders and
the brethren." It is the same also in the French (our
edition is of 17 10), in the German (Luther's), and the
Italian (Diodati's).
And yet the Revision Committee were composed
not only of learned divines, but also of professors and
even bishops ! The American Committee desired it
to be rendered " The apostles and the elders, brethren,"
but the English Committee refused. (See Apostolical
Succession, Bishop and Priest.)
Priest. This is a corruption of Presbyter, prestre,
preost; in German and Dutch, priester ; and in French,
prestre or pretre. Priests are those who profess to
offer up sacrifices for sins, and there are none such in
our church as is proved by the Standard P. B,, i.e., the
Latin sealed book, where a Romish sacerdos (priest) is
condemned and presbyters are not called Sacerdottim
but Presbyteroriini. Even Dr. Hook, who was not a
Low Churchman, tells us that priest is simply an
abbreviated form of presbyter.
In the N. T. the Greek word Jiiereiis is uniformly
applied to a priest of the O. T., but never in a single
instance is it applied to a Minister of the N. T.
In the second P. B. of King Edward, the word
Priest. 239
minister alone was used, but it was changed in many
places to priest in Laud's time and by Archbishop
Sheldon. In the Canons of 1603, Minister alone is
used.
In 1662 the Puritans objected to the word priest in
the P. B., but it was retained in direct opposition to
their wishes.
Dean Stanley shows that it is the doctrine of the
Abyssinian Church (the Episcopal Church who made
Pontius Pilate a Saint) that the body of a layman is
puirfied by kissing the hand of a priest.
The Rev. Joseph Bardsley says that in the Coptic
Church, in. exorcising the devil in baptism, the priest
makes the sign of the cross no less than thirty-seven
times ; nor is this surprising, for they and the people
like the Greek Church, cross themselves continually.
A Russian peasant will often cross himself before
swallowing his glass of brandy.
Dr. Hook says the Greek secular priests, not having
any settled or competent livings, are obliged to subsist
by simoniacal practises, and Marsden, in his book on
TJie Christian Churches, says of the Russian village
priests that " their ignorance is extreme, and their
servility and avarice proverbial. It is not uncommon
to see a priest who has been publicly whipped, like a
miserable vagabond, perform his religious services a
few hours after before the parish which witnessed his
disgrace."
Mrs. Guthrie says the Russo-Greek priests " are
seldom men of birth, a nobleman never entering into
holy orders. The secular clergy are coarse, dirty, and
in condition little above the peasants with whom they
associate. One may occasionally be chosen by a
nobleman to reside in his family as chaplain, but they
never mix with the family, taking their meals with
the footmen."
240 Priest.
About says of the Greek priests " The inferior
clerf^y receive no salary from the State. They levy
certain portions of the harvest, but they live especially
by the altar. They marry, baptize, bury and exorcise
for a fee ; they confess people in their own houses for
a slight consideration. The business of a priest or
papas is sufficiently lucrative without being too
laborious, and the greater part of the Greek priests
bring up comfortably a little family. If the altar does
not yield enough, if the harvest of alms is bad, the
papas finds other resources in agriculture or commerce.
He tills a field, he opens a shop or keeps a public-
house."
In Turkey, our author, among other places visited
the monastery of Loukou near Astros. In conversa-
tion with the Hegoumenos or Superior the latter said :
" We have little to do. When the services are ended
and we have chanted all that is prescribed by the
Canons and made all the signs of the cross ordered
by the Church, our task is finished. I have got a good
chest, as you see, and I sing two hours together with-
out tiring. As for the signs of the cross, which is a
rather more tiresome exercise I am not one-handed
thank Heaven ! My stomach is used to the necessary
fasts, and besides I compensate myself on the other
days." " This good man talked of his Church as a
trader of his shop, and of his prayers as a mason
would of his trowel. The good old ine7i {Kalogeroi —
caloyers) that is what the Greeks call the monks of all
ages, do not err by excess of cleanliness."
We read About's book in Greece during our second
visit to that country, soon after it was published, and
believe it to be a faithful picture.
All these Eastern priests, as well as those of the
Romish Church, arc the equals of our so-called priests
Priest, 24 i
for they have all had Episcopal ordination, and can
therefore, claim admission into our Protestant Church.
This was the work of Archbishop Sheldon, who
added the " Episcopal clause " to the Ordinal, which
gives these priests the right, but at the same time
denied the lawfulness of Non-episcopal ordination,
previous to which Presbyterian ministers and Protes-
tant ministers of the European Continent could exer-
cise the functions of our ministers without reordination.
The words of the Ordinal are plain, and have never
been questioned in the case of R. C. priests. Even a
Jesuit, known to be such, could be admitted into our
Ministry. " No man shall be accounted to be a law-
ful Bishop, Priest or Deacon .... except he be
called, tried and examined . ... or hath had
formerly Episcopal Consecration or Ordination!'
There are bishops now, however, in the R. E.
Church, and in some of the Methodist and other Pro-
testant Churches, and the question might be asked
whether any of our bishops could legally refuse to
receive the Ministers of these Episcopal Churches
without re-ordination ?
William Whittingham was made Dean of Durham
in 1563, though he had received only Presbyterian
ordination at Geneva. His appointment was objected
to fifteen years later by /\rchbishop Sandys, but the
President of the Council, Lord Huntingdon, held that
as the orders of Popish priests were admitted into the
Church of England those of Reformed Churches c.ould
not be disavowed, and in 1582 Archbishop Grindall
granted a license to John Morrison of the Reformed
Church of Scotland, which was then Presbyterian.
The S. P. G., when first founded, sought and obtained
Lutheran ordination for its missionaries in India when
Anglican was not to be had. (See Apostolical Succes-
sion, Bishop, Greek Church and Presbyter)
16
242 Primitive ChurcJi — Purgatory.
Primitive Church. Some considered this to com-
mence with the preaching of our Lord Jesus Christ
and ending with the death of St. John, the last surviv-
ing Apostle, in the year lOO, but Foxe in his "Acts
and Monuments " calls it the next three hundred
years after Christ, with the ten persecutions of the
Primitive Church, ending A.D. 314.
Processions. Processions were abolished at the
Reformation. In the Royal Injunctions of 1547 ap-
pears, " They shall not from henceforth, in any Parish
church, at any time, use any procession about the
Church or Churchyard."
Bishop Horsley said, " Our Church w^hen she separ-
ated from the Roman Communion, wisely retrenched
the pomp and gaiety of shows and processions. . . .
Public worship should be simple without meanness,
dignified without pageantry."
Sydney Smith, a Canon of St. Paul's, called Puseyism
" A system of posture and impostuie, of circumflexion
and genuflexion, of bowing to the east and curtseying
to the west, with any amount of man-millinery and
other tomfooleries ; " and Hislop says of Romish pro-
cessions and banners and singing litanies, etc. (and
surpliced choirs are only the thin edge of the wedge),
" The very idea of such processions was an affront to
the Majesty of heaven ; it implied that GOD who is a
Spirit ' saw with eyes of flesh,' and might be moved
by the imposing picturesqueness of such a spectacle
just as sensuous mortals might." (See Elevation of
the Cup and Paganisui).
Purg'atory. The early Christians did not believe
in purgatory, and the Greek and other Eastern
Churches never did, nor do they now, believe in it. It
was introduced into the Roman Church in 998, but
Purgatory — Quiet Days. 243
what became of the poor souls who departed this hfe
during the ten previous centuries ? The first authori-
tative declaration of it was at the Council of Florence
A.D. 1439.
The Scriptures speak only of immediate transition
to happiness or misery precursory to that which
soul and body must experience at the resurrection,
and no supplications of the living can help them.
There are only two states after death, and St. Paul
believed that as soon as he was ^' absent from the
body " he would be *' present with the Lord."
Mr. Froude says that in Spain on particular days
notices are hung up in the churches "'This day souls
are taken out of purgatory.' It is an intimation to
every one with a friend in distress that now is his
time. You put a shilling in a plate, you give your
friend's name, and the thing is done. One wonders
why, if purgatory can be sacked so easily, any poor
wretch is left to suffer there." And observing that
these modern practices serve to show on a small scale
what once went on on an immense scale, proceeds to
show what is thought of them by those who deal in
them. " A Spanish novelist of some reputation tells
a story of a man coming to a priest on one of these
occasions, putting a shilling on the plate and giving
the name of his friend. 'Is my friend's soul out.'*'
he asked. The priest said it was. 'Quite sure? '' he
then asked. *' Quite sure,' the priest answered. 'Very
well,' said the man, ' if he is out of purgatory they
will not put him in again ; it is a bad shilling.'"
Wycliffe ironically declared that the Pope was very
uncharitable if he allowed one soul to remain in pur-
gatory when he might so easily deliver them.
Quiet Days. Retreats and Quiet Days have lately
been well defined in the English C/uirc/nuan. The
244 Quiet Days.
Rev. S. G. Potter, D.D., says " they are pure pharlsa-
ism, ascetism and essentially Romish, and as surely
anti-Christian. They savour of voluntary humility,
forbidden and denounced by St. Paul in Col. ii, i8."
The Lord Jesus says " When ye pray, enter into
your closet and pray to your F'ather in secret," and
" Where two or three are gathered together in my
name I am in the midst of them " What need, then,
for this pomp and vain pretence before the world,
ushered in with advertisement and parade of soi-disant
sanctity ? Besides, they tend to generate the idea of
formalism in putting off the work of the flesh."
Another correspondent (but we have not room for
the whole) says " Retreats and quiet days are essen-
tially Romish, being a part of the old monkish sys-
tems originated by Rome. As such they form part of
the famous conspiracy formulated by Dr. Pusey and
others, to bring the Established Church into the
Roman fold. Few of the Evangelicals who have
attended these from time to time during the past few
years have remained in the old paths of McNeile and
Close."
" Such attendance has done much to level up Neo-
Evangelicalism, as the famous conspiracy programme
laid down, to a species of negative sympathy with
what is called earnest and spiritual Ritualism. Several
PLvangelical clergymen who found the spell upon them
have discontinued attendance, and so have escaped
Delilah's snare."
" The staunchest Protestant champions to-day in
the ranks of the clergy are those who have never
attended Retreats or Church Congresses. Protestant
congregations notice a change in their clergy after
their return from these retreats, and very often the
first signs of alienation then appear. Bishops are in
favor of them because they tone down the asperities
Quiet Days --Real Presence. 245
and help to promote union and fraternal concord
anaongst the various schools of thought. Holy Scrip-
ture nowhere encourages such retreats. Elijah was
sent away alone, and Paul was led into Arabia alone.
Our Lord was alone in the wilderness. Companies
were for public not private humiliation, or for solemn
league and covenant in broad day light. 'Alone
with God individually, is the Scriptural idea of a quiet
day ' " — and not under a clerical who quietly directs
the thoughts of the people just as he perhaps hopes
to do later on in the confessional.
A retreat may still seem to some as trivial, but some
years ago The Record said "One rood screen and one
retreat may not, perhaps, be esteemed much in a
church, but one case of scarlet fever may in its pro-
gress decimate a population. It would be thought a
serious thing to pass over a case of rinderpest because
it was solitary," and the English ChnrcJnnan remarks
" When grapes grow on thistles, then, and not till
then, can Protestantism be promoted by Clerical Re-
treats, organized by Romanizers."
Real Presence. " The doctrine of the Real Pre-
sence," as the Rev. Hely H. A. Smith says, " is neces-
sary to give consistency to the pretensions of priest-
craft. To offer a piece of bread is an evident absurdity :
hence arose the monstrous fictions of transubstantiation
and consubstantiation, heresies expressly condemned
by the English Church." " What saith
the Scriptures ? And now I imagine the opponent to
stand forth and echo triumphantly, aye — What saith
the Scriptures ? Did not Jesus Christ say ' This is My
body,' and did not Christ mean what He said ? ' Such
an argument is only child's play The same
Lord Jesus that said * This is my body,' said also * I
am the Door :' was He therefore a real door ? He said
246 Rca/ Presence
* I am the Vine : ' was He therefore a tree ? ' I am the
Good Shepherd:' was He Hterally one? John the
Baptist said ' Behold the Lamb of God.' Did those
who looked see a lamb or a man ? Christ on the cross
said to His mother ' Woman, behold thy son,' but
John was not her son. When we point to a dot on a
map and say ' this is London, that is Paris,' who be-
lieves that those populous cities are to be found on
paper ? When a man points to a portrait and says
' that is my father,' who thinks for a moment that he
means to imply a ' real presence,' that he wants us to
believe his father is actually there in propria persona?'''
Travers Hill says " If Clirist really meant that the
bread became His very body and the wine his very
blood, it was the only miracle he ever performed where
the spectators had not visible proof of what He said.
In all His miracles there was a visible change affected
— the dead man lives — the disease vanishes — the sick
man becomes healthy — the lame zualk — the blind see —
the dumb speak — the water becomes real ivme ; but in
this case the bread does not become flesh, neither does
the wine become blood under the hands of Christ ; for
He Himself spoke of the wine after the blessing as
the fruit of the vine ; still less does it under the bene-
diction of the priest ; but the elements remain as they
were before, real bread and real wine, sanctified by
being used in remembrance of the great sacrifice of
His real flesh and blood on the cross once for all!'
" A miracle is something done of which the senses
have proof, though they may not be able to understand
the mode of operation ; but here nothing is done by
the priest, only something asserted to be done, of
which the senses have proof positive to the contrary."
The following clause in the Articles of 1553 was
wholly omitted in Queen Elizabeth's time, and
strange to say has never been restored : " For as much
Real Presence- -Relics. 247
as the truth of man's nature requireth that the body
of one and the self-same man cannot be at one time
in divers places, but must needs be in some one cer-
tain place, therefore the body of Christ cannot be
present at one time in many and diverse places. And
because (as Holy Scripture doth teach) Christ was
taken up into Heaven, and there shall continue until
the end of the world, a faithful man ought not either
to believe or openly to confess the real body presence
(as they term it) of Christ's flesh and blood in the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper."
There is, however, truly a Real Presence, as well in
an Irish shanty as in a Royal Palace, and we have our
most. blessed Lord's word for it — but it is not a bodily
presence, nor is it in the Sacrament — " Where two or
three are gathered together in my name there am I
in the miidst of them." (See Connmmion and Tran-
substantiation.)
Relics. Few Protestants have any idea to what
extent the worship of relics is carried on in the Church
of Rome. We ourselves have never forgotten a visit
to a church in Milan many years ago, when a youth,
in company with some Romanists, when a priest took
out of an opening in the wall beliind the altar, a hand
and arm covered with its dried up flesh and skin,
almost black in color, and as the place where it was
kept was probably damp the relic appeared to be
slightly moist or greasy, like a side of bacon, and had
on it a little mould. Still our companions kissed this
disgusting object without hesitation.
Every altar in a R. C. Church must contain some
relic, and in many cases the number is large, for fre-
quently fragments of bones are shown not larger than
a sixpence.
Calvin in his Treatise on Relics says, " As every,
248 Relics.
even the .smallest R. C. Church has a heap of bones
and other small rubbish, what would it be if all those
things which are contained in two or three thousand
bishoprics, twenty or thirty thousand abbeys, more
than forty thousand convents, and so many parish
churches and chapels, were collected in one mass ? "
The blood of our Lord Jesus Chr st was exhibited
in many places, but not satisfied with the simple blood
only, they showed in the Church of the Lateran the
blood mixed with water that flowed from His side.
At Orleans they had the wine obtained by the mira-
cle at Cana, and the priests were accustomed once a
year to give those who brought offerings a small
spoonful, saying that they should taste of the very
wine made by our Lord at this marriage feast, and
that the quantity never decreased, the cup being
always refilled.
Of pieces of the cross there are enough for a ship's
cargo ! This was never denied, but as in the above
case it was said that whatever quantity of the true
cross was cut off its size never diminished. At Brescia
they even showed the identical cross which appeared
to the Emperor Constantine,* but the people of Con-
stance opposed this claim maintaining that this cross
was preserved in their city.
The coat, the crown of thorns, the sponge, the reed
and every thing else was multiplied in like manner.
The coat without seam of Treves is the most widely
known, but it was said there were eighteen others.
Many of these relics were destroyed at the the Refor-
mation and also during the first French Revolution.
The Virgin's wardrobe has also produced an abund-
ance of relics. At Perusa (Perugia ?) they even
showed her \A'edding ring, and . at Tortosa in Spain
*It must be remembered that Kusebius, when rcl.iling ilic story of
this vi>ion or tlream, says it was a /io/n'//ot(s cros^ in the sky !
Relics. 249
they have her girdle which was brought down from
Heaven by herself in A.D. 1178. Another of her
girdles was formerly preserved in Westminster Abbey.
At Messina they show an autograph letter from the
Blessed Virgin, but at Teormina, also in Sicily, they
possess a letter written by San Diavolo (St. Devil) to
which they evince great devotion, on the principle,
probably of having a friend everyw^here. " Where
they have been able to find such a saint " says Count
Arrivabene, " I cannot say ; but, judging from ivJiat
I heard from a priest at Messina, both letters are
genuine and their authenticity indisputable."
This letter writing is however a very ancient fraud.
Robertson says " In praying to the saints, as formerly
to the heathen deities, it was usual for their votaries
to promise, that if they w^ould grant the petitions
addressed to them, their altars should be richly adorned
and candles should be burned in their honour, but to
threaten that otherwise the altars should be stripped
and the lights extinguished. ... In cases of diffi-
culty, the advice of the saints was asked, sometimes
by prayer, to which an answer was vouchsafed in
visions ; sometimes by laying a letter on the grave or
altar which contained the relics of the saint, witJi a
paper for the expected answer, which if the saint was
propitious w^as given in zvriting, while otherwise the
paper was left blank.
In 875 Charles the Bald, King of France, founded
a convent in Aquitaine, in which was deposited a relic
so exceedingly horrible that Conder does not dare to
mention it in English but only refers to it in Latin.*
At Toledo, in Spain, they have a chasuble made of
heavenly cloth ! The Blessed Virgin was so much
pleased with the church dedicated to her that she de-
*Conder's Stone Lore, or the Monumental History of Palestine,
London, 1886. Page 318.
2SO Rt/iCS.
scended in person to visit it, bringing with her own
hands a beautiful cha.suh\e /on/ieci of /u^ave/ify c/of/i,
and she was so charmed with her statue that she
kissed it, thus bestowing upon it the favor of working
miracles.
The holy sudar>' {sudan'am in Latin) or sheet in
which Christ's body was wrapped, is a large sheet on
which is a complete likeness of the human body, being
the pretended stamp or mark left upon it. There was
one at St. Peter's in Rome, and others at Carcassonne.
Nice, Aix-la-Chappelle, Treves, Besancon and at least
six other places. Upon that at Turin is painted in a
reddish color a double likeness of a human being, />.,
as seen from before and behind, and they say it was
saved by a Christian at the taking of Jerusalem by
Titus. St. John, however, tells us that our Lord was
buried in the manner of the Jews to bury, which was
to wrap the body in a sheet to the shoulders and to
cover the head with a separate cloth. St. Peter saw
the linen clothes, and the napkin that was about His
head wrapped up by itself. How then did the head
appear upon the sheet ? It is evident the manufac-
turers of this relic did not read St. John's Gospel.
The kerchief having the Lord's likeness, called the
St. Veronica, has been so frequently described \hat it
would be tedious to repeat it here.
At Amiens they showed the face of St. John the
Baptist, and there was another at St. Jean d'Angely,
but over a dozen complete heads of the Baptist were
formerly shown, the most important of which was sold
by Pope John XX HL to the Venetians for 50,000
ducats, but the people of Rome would not allow this
wonderful relic to quit the city, and the Pope was
obliged to rescind his bargain. Besides this, more-
over, the town of Toulouse boasts of the possession of
his entire bodv, and there is- another at Verona — and
Relics. 2 5 I
yet St. John was a common man in comparison with
the noble baron !
St. James is the patron saint of Spain, and Santia^^o
is called // Barone or the Baron. An humble fisher-
man would never suit the blue-blooded Spaniards.
They say therefore that he was a noble baron who
owned boats and fished for his amusement.
Everyone has heard of St. Ursula of Cologne and
the eleven thousand virgin martyrs whose skulls are
still exhibited, and which skulls were undoubtedly
collected out of charnel houses centuries ago. The
origin of this absurd legend is ascribed by some anti-
quarians to the following inscription found on a
tomb : —
" St. Ursula et xi. mv."
i.e., St. Ursula and 1 1 martyres virgines, which eleven
martyrs through ignorance or wilful deceit has been
converted into 1 1 mi/ha or thousand virgins ; remind-
ing us of the modern blunder in Spain, when a broken
stone bearing the letters S VlAR was discovered. St.
Viar a new saint, was the cry, and his fame was spread
abroad. The antiquarians, however, soon laughed at
the superstition. It was a broken portion of an in-
scription to a Roman prefect or overseer of the high-
ways, and when complete was Prefectu S VlARUM.
Prefectiis viaruin — Overseer of roads !
St. Denis is the patron saint of France and his
body is preserved in the Abbey of St. Denis near
Paris, but he has another body at Ratisbon, in Ger-
many, and in the latter part of the last century
Ratisbon instituted a lawsuit at Rome to prove that
theirs was the true body, and the justice of their
claim was established by a decision of the Papal
Court delivered in the presence of the French Ambas-
sador, St. Denis, who is said to have been beheaded,
252 R I' lies.
was represented holding his head in his hand, as an
emblem of the manner of his death, and we believe
all legend writers say that when he was beheaded he
picked up his head and walked away with it.
Hyslop proves that this Denis, who is called in the
Calendar Denys and in the Roman Calendar (Oct. 9)
Dionysius, is neither more nor less than Dionusus or
Dionysus, Judge or Ruler of men (as translated by
Cory), the Assyrian title of Bacchus ! Bacchus was
canonized as St. Bacchus the martyr. His day in the
Roman Calendar, Oct. 7, at about which time the old
Pagan Romans used to celebrate what was called
the *' Rustic Festival of Bacchus."
St. Sebastian is perhaps one of the most favored of
the saints, for he had a complete body at Rome, a
second at Soissons, a third at Peligny near Nantes, a
fourth at his birth-place near Narbonne, besides which
he had a head only at another church in Rome, an-
other at Toulouse, an arm at Angers, another at Tou-
lon, a third at Auvergne, a fourth at Monbrisson, and
undoubtedly many more, for w^e have only referred to
France and Italy, so that this saint had at least four
complete bodies besides the two extra heads and four
extra arms.
It must be remembered that all this multiplication
of saints occurred when there was but little intercourse
with different nations, and centuries before Europe was
drawn together by a network of railways.
Professor Draper, of New York, says (and we
shudder as we copy it), that in a monastery at Jerusa-
lem " they presented to the believer one of the fingers
of the Holy Ghost."
At Geneva they had the famous St. Greal or San-
greal, which \\3.s the cup used at the Last Supper. It
was made of a single emerald, but when the French
Relics. 253
took Genoa, in 1800, they examined this priceless
rehc and found it was only green glass !
At Naples they still on his day show the blood of
St. Januarius, and if it liquifies in its bottle it is the
sign of a prosperous year. During the French occu-
pation at the commencement of the present century,
the French Governor was privately informed that the
priests were keeping it solid in the hope of exciting
the people to revolt. He immediately sent an officer
to say that if the blood did not liquefy he would know
the reason why, and the blood flowed forthwith.
They were wiser in i860, when Garibaldi entered
Naples. Noon was the hour at which the process of
change from congelation to liquefaction usually took
place, but this day (Sept. 19), to the astonishment of
the pious inhabitants, at nine o'clock in the morin'ng
salvos of artillery from the fort announced that the
saint had approved of the downfall of the Bourbon
dynasty, by a three hours advance in the time of the
performance of the miracle. The general opinion,
however, was that Garibaldi had sent his orders which
the Archbishop was afraid to disobey.
Bishop Ryle tells us that among other wretched
relics at Bury St. Edmunds in Suffolk they showed
tJie parings of St. Edmund' s toe-nails.
Nail-parings ! Babylonism again. As for the
origin of this mystery we must go to the fountain-
head of iniquity ! Well did the prophet Jeremiah say,
" Babylon . . . that made all the earth drunken :
the nations have drunk of her wine : therefore the
nations are mad."
Conder says " the superstition as to nail-parings,
mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud, seems also
connected with that recorded in the Zendavesta.
Treading on a nail-paring was treading on dead mat-
ter, which defiled the living. To the present day Jew-
254 Relics,
ish women hide their nail-parings. The Esthonians
beUeve that the nail-parings, if not blessed, formed the
visor of the devil's helmet, and in the Edda we read
of a ship with demon crew sailing earthward in the
last day, and built entirely of dead men's nails. In
America many believed that the soul would after a
time return to its bones, take on flesh and live again,
and Garcilasso de la Vega says the Peruvians were so
careful lest any of the body should be lost that they
preserved even the parings of their nails and clippings
of their hair.
Bishop Ryle refers also to the blood of Christ at
Hales in Gloucestershire, and the famous Rood of
Grace at Boxley in Kent. A miraculous circumstance
attended this first relic ; the sacred blood was not
visible to any one in mortal sin, but at the dissolution
of monasteries the whole contrivance was detected.
One side of the vial, which was filled with the blood
of a duck renewed every week, consisted of thin and
transparent chrystal, the other of thick and opaque.
When any rich pilgrim arrived they showed him the
dark side till the Masses and offerings had expiated
his offences ; and then finding his money, or patience,
or faith, nearly exhausted, they made him happy by
turning the vial.
The lips, eyes and head of the Boxley crucifix
moved on the approach of its votaries. Hilsey, Bishop
of Rochester (who was previously prior of Dominican
Iriars in London), broke the crucifix at St. Pauls cross,
and showed the people the springs and wheels by
which it had been secretly moved. These moveable
figures and weeping Madonnas furnished with a wet
sponge inside of the head, were by no means uncom-
mon. At Worcester there was a huge image of the
Virgin which was adored with special veneration, but
when the Royal Commissioners had stripped it of its
Relics. 255
wrappings it turned out to be no virgin at all, but the
statue of an old bishop.
St. Duihach was the patrc^n saint of Tain in Ros-
shire, Scotland. Not only his bones but his very shirt
was preserved there, and such marvellous powers were
ascribed to it that the Earl of Ross wore it for protec-
tion at the battle of Halidon Hill in 1333. He was
slain, nevertheless, but the English courteously re-
turned the shirt to St. Duthach's Church. Whether
its reputation as a life-preserver was then damaged or
no, we are not aware.
One of the most extraordinary collections is at
Cisco in Corsica, where, according to Morris's
Corsica, in a very old church dedicated to St. Cathar-
ine, and which is quite a famous shrine of pilgrimage,
they had among other curious relics a piece of the clay
of which Adam luas made ; a couple of almonds from
Paradise ; Aaron's blossoming staff; a fragment of
the manna of the desert, and of the coat of skin worn
by John the Baptist ; a part of the cradle of the infant
Jesus Christ, and the rod with which Moses divided
the waters of the Red sea !
At Rome, at the Church of Santa Croce in Gerusa-
lemme, as another writer says, " I saw on the wall a
writing in a frame w^hich proved to be a list of the
holy relics contained in the church. I was curious to
see them . . . and, drawing near, read and copied
what I now almost fear to write "
" A piece of the rock on which the Almighty rested
when he wrote the Law of Moses."
" The rock on which Christ stood when He ascended
into heaven " — and among many others, " The finger
which Thomas thrust into the side of Jesus."
Perhaps it may not be out of place to mention here
that in Sir Thomas Moore's Works (1528) is an ac-
count of a remedy for the stone performed at the
256 Relics.
Chapel of St Walerics in Picardy. He says, " For
like as in other pilj^rhiiages ye se hanged up legges
or armes, or such other partes, so was in that chapel
all their offerings were. . . ." He describes also
the operation perforn:ied " at the aulters endel' which
I dare not reprint, only wondering that Sir Thomas,
who was opposed to the Reformation, and who seems,
moreover, to have doubted the efficacy of the remedy,
should have published such a damaging story.*
A horrible fraud was a carved wooden image of the
Saviour that one of the Popes even did not hesitate to
spurn with his foot, for by a mechanical trick drops of
fresh blood were made to trickle down its side. It
was probably Pope Sixtus V. who. Canon Trevor says,
was '' after the Romish fashion, devout," for Gallenga
when relating this only quotes, as if it was a well-
known saying : —
" Papa Sis to
Che no7i perdono ne aftche a Chnsio."
This, however, was no novelty. Robertson says,
" Leontius, Bishop of Neopolis, in Cyprus, at the end
of the sixth century, eloquently defends the worship of
images, in token of honor towards those whom they
represented ; and he speaks of miraculous images
from which blood trickled."
But, save only the autograph letters already referred
to, none of the relics, of which we are aware, not ex-
cepting the Holy Coat of Treves, and we may add the
equally holy Coat of Buddha in India, had any marks
or initials, save and except only the under garment of
the Virgin of Berri in the South of France, and this
latter we think must therefore bear off the palm !
Before the first crusade a Martigao named Gerard
*The whole is given in Home Tooke's Epea Ptuioenta, or the Diver-
sions of Pulley London, i860, page 327.
Relics. 257
Tengue, who was afterwards canonized, founded the
Order of the Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem.
After the capture of Jerusalem in 1099 he received for
his share of the relics the chemise worn by the Blessed
Virgin on the day when she was saluted as the mother
of Christ by the angel Gabriel. A relic which was
considered exceedingly valuable from the unquestion-
able mark of authenticity which it bore in the shape
of the initials M T and L, which were deciphered in
the corner, and which evidently signified Mary of the
Tribe of Levi ! I ! The hospitallers became knights,
and when they removed to Rhodes in 13 10 took the
title of Knights of Rhodes. After the capture of the
Island of Rhodes by the Infidels in 1522, the knights
removed the bones of their founder, together with
this relic, to France where the latter was claimed by
the towns of Martigue (the founder's birthplace) and
Berri, but was adjudged by the Archbishop of Aries
to the latter town, and from that time, that is to
say from about the middle of the sixteenth century,
this chemise was exposed to the faithful every year
on the feast of St. Mary until the first French revo-
lution, when it disappeared, no one knew whither.
It may be said these are all tales of by-gone days,
but did not Cardinal Newman publish his belief in the
alleged miraculous powers of relics and in the winking
Madonna in the Roman States, and that too in a day
when almost every child's wax doll opens and shuts
its eyes .'*
Are not Notre Dame de la Salette and Notre Dame
de Lourdes in France and Our Lady of Knock in Ire-
land modern idols, and is there not a multitude of such,
and of relics, not a few of which are in the Province
of Quebec. St. Anne dc Beaupre appears to be a
favorite there now, and we hear of so-called "miracu-
lous " cures performed there. No doubt cures are
17
258 R credos — Rittialism.
sometimes effected, but it is the work of the imagina-
tion alone. Faith cures, as they are sometimes called.
No principle is more familiar to all physicians than
that the apprehension of a disease is a pretty sure way
to bring it on, and that the firm belief in a cure is a
very effectual help to the physician. (See All Saints
and Calendar^
Reredos. Implying that the holy Table is a fixed
altar, which is not, but on the contrary a table in the
ordinary sense of the word, on legs and moveable.
As the Church Intelligencer says, it is intended " to
make the table to look like a fixture or * sideboard '
for the display of flower-pots and candlesticks, and in
this way to suggest to the unthinking that it was
never designed by the Founder of the Covenant-feast
for a Supper-table.''
Sometimes the reredoses are of sculptured stone,
bearing imagery, and if so they are contrary to the
second commandment. (See Altar and Communion
Table)
Reserved Sacrament. Our twenty-eighth article
says : " The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not
by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up,
or worshipped." (See Elevation 01 the Cup.)
Retreats. (See Quiet Days.)
Ritualism. The whole system of ritualism was
ably described by the late venerable Bishop Mcllvaine
as being " One of church instead of Christ — priest in-
stead of Gospel — concealment of truth instead of
manifestation of truth — ignorant superstition instead
of enlightened faith — bondage wherein we arc prom-
ised liberty — all tending to load us with whatever is
Ritualism — Rogations. 259
odious in the worst meaning of priestcraft, in place of
the affectionate, enlarging, elevating and cheerful
liberty of a child of GOD."
Rog'ations. These litanical, processional and fast-
ing days were instituted not even by a Pope, but only
by a R. C. bishop.
The Pagan Romans were fond of processions, one
of which was changed to Candlemas, another to St.
Mark's Day, another in honor of the goddess Ceres
was called Ambarvalia, because the victims were car-
ried around the fields, and still another was called Ter-
minalia, in honor of the god Terminus, who was con-
sidered the guardian of fields and landmarks. In the
year 460 (some say 452), on account of national cala-
mities, these last were changed to Rogation Days
[rogo, to ask or beseech) by Mamertus, Bishop of
Vienne, in France, and in imitation of the Pagans the
clergy, attended hy men and boys, marched through
the fields singing and supplicating blessings upon the
fruits of the earth. They soon became common, and
were introduced in England as early as A.D. 847, and
were there also called Gang days or Walking days.
As they walked through the fields the clergy, at cer-
tain places called Gospel trees, read in Latin (!) a part
of the Gospel, and in a Dialogue of the year 1554,
quoted by Brand, we read, " What say ye to proces-
sions in Gang-daies, when Sir John* saith the Gospel
to our corne fields?" The reply is " As for your Latin
Gospels read to the corne, I am sure the corne under-
standeth as much as you, and therefore hath as much
profit by them as ye have, that is to sai, none at al,"
and in 1570, a minister named Kethe complains that
in Rogation Week they had their " Gospelles at
superstitious crosses deck'd like idols!'
*Priests were sometimes called vSir.
26o Ro,^at7'oi2s.
A very important part of thc^e Religions Litanical
Processions was not only to whip but even to cruelly
abuse some of the boys at the bounds of the parishes
to impress upon them the situations of the boundaries.
In the Churchwarden's Books at Chelsea is the fol-
lowing entry in 1679 :—
Spent at the Perambulation Dinner. . ^3 10 9.
Given to the boys that were ivhipt . . 40.
In Hone's Year Book it is said that a man if asked
if such a stream were the boundary would probably
reply, " Ees, that 'tis, I'm sure o't, by the same token
that I were tossed into 't, and paddled about there like
a water-rat, till I were hafe dead," and Sir Henry
Ellis, revisor of Brand's Antiqnities, says in 1849,
" Bumping persons to make them remember the parish
boundaries has been kept up even to our own time."
Marriages were prohibited from the first day of
Rogation week until Trinity Sunday- — about twenty
days, but of course dispensations could always be
obtained — -for a consideration !
We have enlarged upon this subject because although
at the Reformation prayers for this season were abol-
ished, still we must fast on those days, for the seed
remained in the Calendar, and in 1880 the Synod of
the Diocese of Niagara, not satisfied it seems with
fasting only, memorialized the Provincial Synod held
at Montreal in favor of prayers for this French R. C.
bishop's institution.
It is passing strange, but in the Prayer Book
Revised, although they wisely omitted the Table of
Fasts they retained the Table of Feasts, including
Rogation Sunday — but we Englishmen have the repu-
tation of being fond of good dinners, and why not
when our P. B. tells us " All Sundays in the year "
are Feast Days.
Roman CJiui'ch. 261
Roman Church. The whole structure of the Papal
Authority is built upon the claim of " Succession to
St. Peter," and this authority is asserted for the sake of
the primacy supposed to be developed upon him in the
text " Thou art Peter and upon this rock will 1 build
my Church."
The first writer who mentions the tradition of Peter's
having visited Rome is Justin Martyr, who died about a
century after him. He relates a Idgend that St. Peter
went in pursuit of Simon Magus, who after his defeat
fled to Rome and was there worshipped as a god, and
in support of this story Justin appeals to an image
which he had seen in an Island in the Tiber with the
inscription " Simoni Deo Sancto."
The Italian proverb was most wonderfully verified
in this instance — " Truth may languish but can never
perish."
Fourteen centuries after the death of the Grecian
philosopher, who died a Christian martyr about A.D.
165, in the year 1574, this very inscription was found
on a stone in the Tiber and proves to be " Semoni
Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum." Justin who did not under-
stand Latin, was either imposed upon or the stone
may have been pointed out to him by some one as
ignorant as himself, for the dedication is not to Simon
but to the twin demi-gods Semo-Sancus.
Irenaeus in a work written about the time of Justin's
death, is the next who mentions it, and he says that
according to tradition the Church of Rome was founded
by Peter and Paul. Dionysus, bishop of Corinth,
about A.D. 180, calls the Roman and Corinthian
churches the joint planting of Peter and Paul ; but
the bishop was mistaken with regard even to his own
church, which was founded by Paul. Garbling was
not uncommon even then, and this bishop complained
of the falsification of his works.
262 Roman CJnirch.
The Church of Rome says that Peter was the first
Pope and that he held the pontificate for twenty-five
years from A.D. 42 to A.D. 66.
The N. T., however, shows that Peter was in Jeru-
salem about the year 42, when Paul visited him there.
Then he went to Lydda, and to Joppa, and to Caesa-
rea, and "elsewhere." This last could certainly not
signify Rome, for after naming the not very important
town of Lydda the capital of the world could not
have been slurred over as " elsewhere."
In 44, he was imprisoned by Herod Agrippa. In
56, he was present at the Apostolic Council held in
Jerusalem.
After all this detail, if he was bishop of Rome at
the time why does not the N. T. say so ?
In 58, Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans from
Corinth, and if Peter had been bishop of Rome would
he have passed him over in silence? He greets many
persons but does not name Peter who called Paul his
beloved brother.
In 60, Peter wrote his Epistle dated at Babylon, and
here the Roman Church are in a dilemma, and rather
than allow that Peter was not then in Rome they prefer
to allow this was the Great Babylon of the Apocalypse,
striving however to avert the point of the Divine
wrath pronounced against it by distinguishing between
Rome as a Pagan city and Rome as a Christian
church, and that the woes pronounced were against
the former. But Great Babylon was then unknown,
for Peter wrote in 60, and the Revelation was written
in 96,
Babylon was in existence in the first century ac-
cording to Strabo, and not void of inhabitants,
although desolate in comparison with the great city
of Nebuchadnezzar. It appears to have been then an
important Jewish colony for Lightfoot says, " it was
Roman CJiurcJ:, 563
one of the greatest knots of Jews in the world," and
St. Peter w^as not the Apostle of the Gentiles, but the
minister of the circumcision.
Peter wrote two Epistles only, the first from Baby-
lon to the " dispersed " in Asia Minor. The second
in 66, not dated but apparently from the same place
and evidently to the same to whom the first was
written. No allusion is made in either to Rome.
About 62, Paul arrived in P.ome and met the
Christians of that city, but Peter's name is not men-
tioned. He remained there two years in his own
hired house. Had Peter then been Pope would he
have allowed his beloved brother to live in lodgings ?
Paul wrote five Epistles from Rome, viz., to Phile-
mon, the Colossians, the Ephesians, the Philippians
and one to Timothy, but not a word about Peter,
although he refers to as many as twenty-seven persons
by name. In his last, written shortly before his
martyrdom, he says, " Only Luke is with me." He
says too, " At my first answer no man stood with me,
but all men forsook me."
According to the Roman Church, Peter was then in
Rome. Did he then forsake his brother Paul in his
affliction? Should it be said that Peter was himself
then in prison why did not Paul mention that his co-
Apostle was confined, in the same way in which he
informed Philemon of the imprisonment of Epaphras?
After the Holy Scriptures we naturally look to the
" Apostolic Fathers " whose writings are almost the
only records we have of the first two centuries after
Christ. These were Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius,
Barnabas and Hermas, but in none of them is there
any evidence as to St. Peter's residence or episcopate
at Rome. Not a single sentence corroborative of the
Papal claims.
The Roman Church say that Peter was martyred
2.6 \ Roman ChurcJi.
by the Emperor Nero, A.D. 67-8, but for this there is
no proof whatever — it is tradition — tradition alone !
No wonder that in that Church tradition is placed on
a level with Holy Scripture !
Moreover until within a few years only it was a
standing tradition that no successor ivas ever to attain
the ''years of St. Peter^^ but the late Pius the Ninth
finished that tradition.
Papias is sometimes quoted, but all that we know
of him is from Eusebius, who only speaks of his works
as having a traditional existence. " There are said to
be five books of Papias," and that he recorded on hear-
say, "strange tales, and some other things rather too
fabulous," and deplores the effect of his testimony on
those that came after him. His works were lost be-
fore the time of Eusebius.
Eusebius who died A.D. 328, is called the Father
of Ecclesiastical History and he confesses to attempt-
ing to travel a " trackless and unbeaten path " and
professes to do no more than to give at intervals
certain traditions that were current in his day and the
names of authors who were said to have been asso-
ciated with the traditions. He tells us that it is not
improbable that the relics of Peter were found in Rome
in the time of Nero. N'ot improbable it was thought
less than three centuries after his death, and therefore
not certain ! Augustine's words a century later are
*' People say {Dicimt homines) that the body of Peter
is in Rome " and further on he adds " The body of
Paul is there." Of Peter it is a report only, of Paul a
fact.
As Canon Trevor says " not a particle of historical
evidence exists that the Apostle Peter ev^er visited
Rome at all, while the legend of his death and burial
there are contrary to Scripture and to common sense."
The primacy of Peter was never heard of during
Roman CJuirch. 265
the first three centuries of the Church and must have
been unknown at Rome, itself when St. John's church
ranked above St. Peter's.
Origen (died about A.D. 255) says "The rock is
every disciple of Christ. If thou thinkest that the
whole Church is built by GOD upon Peter only, what
dost thou say of John, the son of thunder, and every
one of the other Apostles ? Or shall we dare to say
that the gates of hell were not to prevail specially
against Peter ? Were they, then, to prevail against the
other Apostles and the faithful ?
Chrysostom (died A.D. 407) says, " ' Thou art Peter
and upon this rock 1 will build my church,' that is on
the faith of his confession."
Rufinus, who was next to Jerome the most learned
biblical scholar of his age, and who died in 410, says,
" The Lord Jesus Christ is both the Rock and the
Head. Concerning this rock the Lord Himself said,
' And upon this rock I will build my church.' "
Jerome (died A.D. 420), says, "On this rock the
Lord founded His church ; from this rock the Apostle
Peter obtained his name. . . . ' And I will give you
the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' Bishops and
presbyters not understanding this passage assume to
themselves something of the superciliousness of the
Pharisees, thinking that they can condemn the inno-
cent and absolve the guilty."
Augustine, the great Bishop of Hippo (died A.D.
430), explains the text more clearly, and among the
moderns " Janus " says " Of all the Fathers who inter-
pret these passages in the Gospels (Matt. xvi. 18,
John xxi, 17), not a single one applies them to the
Roman bishops as Peter's successors."
For the rest we refer to the articles on Apostolical
Succession, Auricular Confession, Brotherhoods, Lent,
Priest, Relics, etc., only adding in conclusion that
266 RoJ7ian Church — Rood Sci'ccn.
Bishop Wordsworth once said, " The Holy Spirit for-
bids us to look for union with the Church of Rome.
We cannot unite with her as she is noiv, and it forbids
us to expect that Rome will be other than she is. It
reveals the awful fact that Babylon will be Babylon to
the end."
Rood Screen. This was a screen separating the
chancel from the nave, across the chancel arch, on
which was placed the rood or crucifix with figures of
the Blessed Virgin and St. John on either side.
Rood screens originated in the Eastern Church and
date their origin from the earliest ages when the " disci-
pline of the secret " was observed, and when the cere-
monies of the communion were held to be of such a
sacred and mysterious nature that it was not permitted
to the communicants to reveal what took place.
The images were taken down at the Reformation,
but unfortunately the screens were in many cases
allowed to remain, but why should we have them in
newly built churches ? The architects will of course
recommend them and everything else of the kind, as
the simpler and more Protestant a church is, and the
more in accordance with St. Paul's words that GOD is
not worshipped by men's hands, so much less will be
their commissions.
We remember when an aged friend had agreed to
preach for a brother clergyman on a Christmas day.
The day previous as he was passing the church, the
doors being open he entered and saw to his surprise a
rood screen of evergreens about eight feet high. He
immediately notified the Rector that he could not
officiate the next day as the temporary affair was the
thin edge of the wedge, for he had seen a similar case
in P2ngland where such an one was made, the people
were led to consider it the proper thing, and soon after
Rood Screen — Sacraments. l6y
when restoring the church a real rood screen was
erected.
Rood screens were probably not known in the
United States half a century ago, as they are not men-
tioned in Staunton's Church Dictionary.
While this work was in press we saw in the London
Church Intelligencer an address by the Rev. A.
Haworth, who said : " Gates were now being put up in
the chancel, so that the vulgar could not enter. The
layman must not go into his church — only the petti-
coated choristers and the ministers must go in. They
were going back to the time when it was said in the
Homilies : ' They peeped and muttered through the
gratings.' " (See Chancel and Crucifix^
Sacraments. Christ ordained two sacraments only,
viz., Jiaptism and the Lord's Supper, as we read in the
Articles.
In 1439, however, the Romish Church declared
there were seven, viz., confirmation, penance, orders,
matrimony, and extreme unction, and a century later
(1546) placed tradition on a level with Holy Scripture.
At the Reformation we retained only the two appointed
by our Lord, but the Romanists in our Church wish to
see a return of the exaltation of the sacraments and a
closed Bible, even as Baptist Noel foresaw at the com-
mencement of the Puseyite movement (see Ambas-
sador), when he said : —
" Sacraments the priest extols,
For it is he each rite controls,"
and quite lately the Rev. George Everard of Dover
says, " One of the latest developments of Ritualistic
teaching is to disparage the authority of the Word,
and to teach men that it is izot necessary for Chris-
tian men. With the idea of exalting the authority of
268 SacraTiitm — Separation of Sexes.
the church, they do not hesitate to put aside the Word
of God as only of secondary importance. I take the
printed report of a meeting of the E. C. U, at CHfton,
where one of the leaders of the party made these
remarks : ' The Bible zuas not generally necessary to
Salvation. It was most helpful, and no one of them
could but feel that it was a most serious detriment of
their spiritual life if they were without the volume ;
and yet, just as the church existed zvithoiit the
New Testament^ the church could exist without the
Bible. It was the Sacraments winch were necessary
to salvation — the Sacraments winch %vere administered
by the church' "
This differs widely from the Catechism. " How
many Sacraments hath Christ ordained in his church?
Answer. Two only as generally necessary to sal-
vation "
Generally necessary, that is to say, not universally —
not absolutely — as the E. C. U. would have us believe.
(See Communion, Preparation and Wafers).
Saerarium. Another term for a so-called " Sanct-
uary."
Sanctuary. A term applied to the chancel because
the Real Presence is supposed to be there ; but there
is no Holy of Holies in the present dispensation. (See
Chancel).
Separation of Sexes. This was a custom of the
early church, which may probably have been derived
from the usages of Jewish worship, or it may be
simply a feature of Oriental life and manners, where
females were kept in greater seclusion than in the
West. But why revive such a custom now } (See
Chancel.)
Sisterhoods. 269
Sisterhoods. Deaconesses were a recognized order
in the Apostolic times. They were not to be admitted
until sixty years of age, ahhough later, forty years
was allowed in some cases. They continued to exist
until the fourth or fifth century, when they ceased to
bear order in the Church, and vanished into the
cloisters. This is the origin of sisterhoods.
The secrets of Nunneries have often been disclosed.
As early as the fourteenth century, " The Revelations
of St. Bridget" appeared, and these "Revelations"
were subsequently recognized by the councils of
Constance and Basil, and by three popes. Describ-
ing the convents Bridget writes : — " The doors through
which the sisters are pleased to afford an entrance to
clergymen and laymen, are open even at night
. ." And Clemangis, a Romish doctor of divinity
in Paris, about the same time, when pleading for a
Reformation, describes the sisterhoods of his day, in
words which are too gross for quotation, and Bishop
Ryle says, the discoveries made by Henry VIII's
Commissioners, of the " goings on in many of the so-
called religious houses, were such as it is impossible
to describe. Anything less ' holy ' than the practice
of many of these 'holy' men and women in their pro-
fessedly ' holy ' retreats from sin and the world, the
imagination cannot conceive."
Even in the present century, Roscoe, in his life of
the reforming Italian Bishop de Ricci, shows nunner-
ies had not improved. In a French history, " Vie de
Scipion de Ricci eveque de Pistoia et P7'ato" pub-
lished at Brussels in 1826, details are given which an
English publisher would not dare to print, and this of
nunneries filled with the noblest ladies of the land,
who had in many cases to prove their sixteen quarter-
ings of nobility.
And yet how many Protestants send their daughters
270 Sisf.^rhoods — Siirpliccd CJioir.
to convent schools, where it has been proved times
without number, that notwithstanding all promises to
the contrary, (for what are promises in a church
which considers lying a venial sin, and no sin at all if
for the good of the church ?) Romish doctrines have
been instilled into young girls, who have been care-
fully taught to keep the facts secret from their parents,
and when taught to cross themselves, they are told
not to do it openly " but secretly, for fear of offend-
ing weak brethren." A girl's confidant should be her
good mother.
Dr. Pusey many years ago, declared that the Sister
of Mercy is the pioneer of the priest. Where the
sister goes the priest follows after. She goes before
into many a home, for the purpose of propagating
amongst the people those Romish doctrines which
will lead them to welcome heartily the Father Con-
fessor, to release them from the burden of their sins,
as they vainly think. (See Brothei'hoods.)
Surpliced Choir. Placing a row of boys on either
side of the chancel to lead the devotions of their
seniors. By their dress and position they are separa-
ted from the main body of worshippers and instead
of being merely the leaders in the service they generally
monopolize it.
By donning the surplice alone, the men and boys (if
only they can sing) become at once Assistants to the
PriestJiood, and as such a superior caste, with the
right to sit in the chancel, and in some churches they
even administer the Communion to them before it is
given to the humble laity. We are sometimes told
moreover that " robed in white they represent the
angels !" — all moreover tending to the P^xaltation of
the Priesthood, for the " priest " becomes a very
Surpliced Choir. 27 1
important personage when marching in procession
surrounded by such a host of satellites.
The Evangelical Ministers made a great mistake in
allowing the choirs to be placed in the chancels. Like
everything else the Surpliced Choir was a work of
degrees, commencing with choral services, then re-
moving the choir from the west gallery and finally
clothing the men and boys in white. Mr. Machon-
ochic acknowledged this in rather a boastful speech
made in 1869. He added " he didn't care a straw for
the surplices and the rest if there was not catholic
teaching with it but after all
these things led to*something else, and a priest who
began by bringing down his choir from the gallery to
the Chancel often ended — and in no long time — by
becoming thoroughly Catholic in his teaching and in
his doctrine."
At a meeting of Church Workers in Canterbury a
few years ago Dr. Longhurst, organist of the cathedral,
insisted on the value of female voices in leading the
services of the Church, and instanced the case of
Miriam as well as the appointed women-singers of
David's time as Scriptural authority for their employ-
ment and the Rev. J. Hurst, a minor Canon of Canter-
bury spoke against the prominent place in the chancel
given to choirs, especially when partly constituted of
females, a criticism which Dr. Longhurst endorsed.
Fifty years ago it would have been difficult, perhaps
impossible, to find surpliced choirs in chancels in
parish churches.
Assistants to the Priesthood were then not considered
necessary — but now how changed.
Dean Stanley relates the following story of " a dis-
tinguished prelate now deceased : " "A clergyman
who had contended in his village church for various
points of ceremonial, at last ventured to ask with fear
2/2 Siirpliced Choir.
and trembling, whether ' his lordship could allow the
choristers to appear in surplices ? ' 'By all means,"
said the bishop, ' let them appear in surplices, it will
help to degrade that vestment' " " What he meant,
of course," continued the Dean, '' was that the sur-
plice would then lose its peculiar sacerdotal signifi-
cance."
A curious case, reported in the English Churchman,
came before the Derbyshire Quarter Sessions in 1885.
A Mr. Glossop appealed against a decision of magis-
trates, who fined him 5s. and costs for alleged indecent
behaviour in Charlesworth Church. The appellant
" smiled " at the surpliced choir, and as they were
marching back at the end of the service, he observed
that they "looked well in their night shirts." Mr.
Horace Smith argued that there was no indecency or
disturbance of the service within the meaning of the
Act, and the Court held that the conviction could not
be maintained.
When the blacks first saw it in Australia they said,
" dat fellow white man been wearin him shirt outside
him trouser."
Surpliced Choirs are a remnant of that particular
cultus according to which a woman is an imperfect
human being and therefore inadmissible ; but the chief
objection to them is that it is opposed to congregational
worship, and is a direct step towards forcing the mem-
bers of the congregation to be present as spectators
during those portions of Divine Service which the Re-
formers were so anxious that the entire congregation
should be personally engaged in ; and the *' hearty
and reverent services " that we hear so much of now,
gener<dly consist for the most part in a display of
elaborate music in which the congregation have con-
sented to worship by proxy.
If there is a place in the P. B. where there should
Surpliced Choir. 273
not be the presence of thrilling music to sway the
imagination and produce pleasurable emotions, but
where God's word should calmly and solemnly appeal
directly to the conscience and understanding, it is in
the rehearsal of the Decalogue, and as Simpson says
in The Clergyman s Manual, " The responses after
the Commandments should never be chanted ; it is
both irregular and indecorous. Sinners who are aware
of their condemnation by the holy law of GOD (Gal.
iii., 10, James ii., 10) will not be disposed to sing."
As the Rev. Joseph Bardsley says, speaking of what
is too common a case where the minister has " given
up the reins into the hands of the organist and choir."
" There was as much point as truth in the remark of
a working man, who, when seeing his clergyman in
this kind of bondage, said, he took it for granted that
the verse in the Psalms had been wrongly translated,
that it ought to have been — the " singers go before and
the ministers follow after."
The IrisJi Church Advocate said : " There is so
much jealousy among professional musicians that de-
votional feeling is practically impossible ; for an emi-
nent reputation has to be gained to ensure private
tuitions, which is the all absorbing strain upon their
faculties. They must be great soloists or they are
nothing, and public flattery helps to fan the flame of
their earthly vanity to a pitiable extent. A grip of
the audience, in or out of church, must be reached, for
it is vital to worldly success, and true devotion with
becoming modesty is a matter of secondary import-
ance, and in most cases of no importance at all."
When the members of the congregation on leaving
the church remark, generally without even thinking of
the sermon, that the music or singing was better than
usual, was exquisite and the lik^ (and we seldom hear
2/4 Siirpliced Choir — Surplice in the Pulpit,
such observations without a feeUng of sorrow), do they
refer to the voice of the congregation —
"Let the people praise thee O God."
or to the music and singing of their deputies, the skil-
ful organist and the choir?
Is the Almighty to be worshipped by deputy ?
Is there not as great a rush to the fashionable
churches on Sunday as to the Opera during the week ;
crowded churches to the ecclesiastical and crowded
houses to the theatrical performances ; perhaps to the
same musicians, the only difference being that while
they may sing La Traviata during the week they sing
psalms to operatic music, songs to the angels and the
like on Sundays — and do the clergy ** love to have it
so, and what will ye do in the end thereof? "
Surplice in the Pulpit. Ritualists condemn the
Academical Gown because it is the time-honored Re-
formation preaching dress in England and on the
European Continent, and that of our martyred
Reformers whom they despise, and consider on the
contrary that the Surplice marks the sacrificing priest,
but as we have already shown there are no priests in
our church.
Archbishop Laud in his day, and Pusey in our own,
both attacked the black gown as a very important
outwork of Protestantism, and yet how many Low
Churchmen treat it with indifference and say it is not
a matter of vital importance, an expression that has
been used towards almost all of Dr. Pusey's innova-
tions, who taught that everything should be done
by degrees. It was by such a gradual change that he
introduced the surplice. " When the black gown is in
use in the pulpit on Sunday (wrote he) let it disap-
pear in the week. The surplice will soon be preferred
and will oust its rival."
Surplice in the Pulpit. 275
Nevertheless some of our brethren who look upon
it as a trifle may possibly be in the right. It is like
the British Flag and the Flag of the Red Republic —
a matter of perfect indifference — they are merely bits
of bunting !
Among military men, however, who are peculiarly
sensitive on points of honor, there is an expression
" False to his colors."
The surplices were formerly sewn up and drawn
over the head, but about the early part of the last
century when the enormous wigs were worn, it was
found necessary to make them open in front. Pepys
mentions that he saw a clergyman after prayers, pull
the surplice over his head in the reading-desk, and as
his gown was under his surplice he was not compelled
to go to the Vestry Room to change his robes.
In Staunton's Church Dzctiouary we see the light it
was viewed in New York, in 1849. Under "Clerical
Garments," " The Surplice^ a plain white linen gar-
ment, worn at the reading of divine service, the
administration of baptism, and the Holy Communion,
and frequently at marriages and funerals when they
take place in the church. A black silk scarf is gener-
ally worn with the surplice, reaching from the neck or
shoulders to the feet." And under the headingf
" Surplice," we read " A flowing white garment used
by the clergy in reading the Morning and Evening
Prayer, in the administration of the Holy Communion,
and in general, in all offices of the church except
preacJiing!' (The Italics are ours). Proof positive
that the Surplice in the pulpit was then unknown in
the American Colonies and the United States, where
there had been English Church congregations for
nearly two centuries, under the bishop of London
until the revolution, soon after which the present
Episcopal Church was organized. (See Black Gozun
and Vestments).
276 T anil nil z.
Tammuz. Half a century ago, or less, how many
could have given any information whatever concerning
this Pagan Sun-god (see Cross) ? By many writers
the name was entirely passed over.
Nineveh and the clay records of ancient Babylonia
were not then even dreamt of and we ourselves re-
member reading an ably written French work, proving
undoubtedly to the satisfaction of most of its readers,
that it was utterly impossible that there could have been
such a great city as Nineveh, for had there been such
its enormous ruins could not have been entirely lost
and forgotten, but only a year or two after (in 1843)
M. Botta, another Frenchman, discovered the first As-
syrian monument, and he was soon followed by Lay-
ard, and we have now not only records but even dic-
tionaries and vocabularies compiled by the Assyro-
Babylonians themselves.
D'Oyley and Mant's Notes to the Holy Bible, pub-
lished by the S.P.C.K. in 1848, was a standard work
at the time, but all that we read in over 1500 pages is
" The ancient expositors considered Tammuz as Ado-
nis. This was a Phoenician superstition. It was de-
rived from Egypt, and afterwards the Phoenicians im-
proved it. Bp. Wai'biirton. W, LoutJil' and of pray-
ing toward the east (Ezek. viii. 16), they say, " This is
a description of the Persian superstition."
In Anthon's Classical Dictionary (New York, 1880)
he is not mentioned under the letter T., but is referred
to under Adonis, and in Young's Concordaiice (New
York, 1888) all that is said is "A Syrian and Phoeni-
cian idol ; the Adonis of the Greeks." Egypt, Phoenicia,
Syria and Persia, but not one word of Babylon !
Dr. William Smith in his Dictionary of the Bible
(Boston revised edition, 1880) says "The tradition re-
corded by Jerome which identifies Tammuz with Ado-
pis has been followed," etc., and also " All that can be
Tammuz. 277
said therefore is that it is not impossible that Tammuz
may be a name of Adonis the Sun-god, but there is
nothing to prove it." On the contrary, however, it
was not a tradition nor incapable of proof, for Jerome
who lived in Palestine when the rites of Tammuz
were observed, tip to the very time when he wrote, ex-
pressly identifies Tammuz with Adonis in his Com-
nie7itary on Ezekiel !
The following are Jerome's very words— how could
Dr. Smith have forgotten them ? " Whom we have
interpreted Adonis, both the Hebrew and the Syrian
languages call Thamuz . . . and they call the
month June by that name."
All that Dr. Smith says of Bacchus is " Luther and
others regarded Tammuz as a name of Bacchus ; " —
neither does he know the cause of the wailing.
Zoeckler in his Cross of CJirist, only as late as 1877,
in 447 pages, does not even mention the name of
Tammuz.
We have yet to learn the original name of this sun-
deity for the Phoenician Tammuz is only a corruption
of the Akkadian Dumu-zi, which does not appear to
be a name, nor hardly a sobriquet, a term we have
commonly employed herein as it is not generally used
in English in a derisive sense as the word nickname
frequently is.
Hyslop in his Tzvo Babylons (London, 1871) is we
think the first who entered fully into the subject,
showing from Hesychius, that his Phoenician name
was Bacchus, or the Lamented One, and that the mys-
tic Tau was his initial.
The late George Smith in his Chaldean Account of
Genesis, by Professor Sayce, points out however that
Tammuz is the Semitic form of the Akkadian Dumu-zi
which signifies in that language " the only son," and
that he is referred to not only in Eztkiel but also in
278 Tainumz.
Jeremiah, Amos and Zechariah. He says, '* One of
the strange and dark features of the Babylonian reli-
gion was the Istar or Venus worship, which was an
adoration of the reproductive power of nature, accom-
panied by ceremonies which were a reproach to the
country. Tammuz, the young and beautiful Sun-god,
the dead bridegroom of Istar, seems to be also
spoken of as the brother of her handmaid Kharimat.
This explains, as M. Lenormant has pointed out, the
passage in Jeremiah xxii. 18, w^hich preserves a por-
tion of the wailing cry uttered by the worshippers of
Tammuz or Adonis, when celebrating his untimely
death. This should be rendered : ' Ah me, my
brother, and ah me, my sister ! Ah me, Adonis, and
ah me, his lady ! ' Reference is made to the worship
of Tammuz, which was carried on within the temple
itself at Jerusalem, in Ezek. viii. 14, Am.os viii. 10
(where we should translate * as at the mourning for the
only son ' Tammuz), and Zech. xii. 10, 1 1."
In Hebrew Adon, Adonai, signified Lord. In Phoe-
nician, according to Bryant, Ad signified Lord, and On
the Sun. Adon, the Lord Sun. In Scandinavia
Adon became Odin.
Tammuz was not only the bruizer of the serpent's
head, but he was also worshipped as the incarnation
of Noah, for he was Oannes or Eanus or Janus, the
Man of the Sea {i. e. the Noachian sea) or the Man-
fish, the Fish-god, Dag On (the Fish On of the Phil-
istines), the Rain-god (for it rained 40 days and 40
nights) ; he was the same also as Osiris who floated
so long in his coffin ; Jerome tells us that Bacchus
and Dagon were identical — and this could be carried
on ad infinitum.
A figure of Oannes from Khorsabad, wearing a
headdress surmounted by a cross is engraved in Bar-
ing-Gould's Curious MytJis, but in Layard's Ninevc/i,
Tainmiiz. 279
from which it purports to be taken, and in Smith's
Dictionary of the Bible ^ it is a fleur-de-Hs. An im-
portant difference, as the one is the symbol of Tam-
niuz and the other of Isis.
Tammuz was moreover known as a corrupted re-
nr.iniscence of Noah, ^_7 //2> cross, in Scotland, America
and Africa.
Martin in his History of the Western Isles, London,
1716, says of the Island of Harris, *' There is a stone
ir the form of a cross, about five feet high, called the
V/ater Cross, for the natives had a custom of erecting
this sort of cross to procure rain, and when they had
got enough they laid it flat on the ground."
In Central America the cross was the emblem of
Tlaloc, the Aztec rain-god, and the Aztec rain-god-
dess bore a cross in her hand and at her feast victims
were nailed to a cross and shot with arrows. The
mantle of Quetzalcoatl, the Toltec god of rain and
health, was covered with red crosses.
In the London Graphic, of Sept. 27th, 1879, in a
review of a work on Central Africa, is an engraving of
some sticks, about the size of walking canes, with
cross-pieces tied on just below the top, standing erect
in small earthen mounds. They are described simply
as " Charms erected in the vicinity of the towns and
villages to attract rain."
The celebrated tablet of the cross of Palenque in
Central America is well known, as it is now in the
National Museum in Washington, D.C., but there is a
stucco bas-relief in the palace of Palenque engraved in
Short's North Americans of Antiquity ^ of a seated
figure with a cross projecting from his apparently
shaved head. The Maltese cross (so-called) and the
T (tau) cross occur frequently: and there is a remark-
able sculptured stone tablet, also engraved by Short,
of a figure, apparently a deity, with a medallion or
28o
Taniinuz.
ornament suspended from the neck on which is a
perfect T (tau).
Many of these were cut in stone countless ages ago.
Palenque, as it is now called, is perhaps the oldest ruir
in America, and is supposed to have been founded
lOOO years B.C. It was an abandoned city when
the Spaniards arrived, but strange to say, in British
Columbia, where there are no imperishable stons
temples and palaces, T (tau) crosses have been pre-
served by the savages to this very day, and it is the
only case that we can recall to mind where they have
been thus preserved.
In Vancouver Island every Indian village had for-
merly its quota of carved posts, most
of which are still remaining and new
ones are constantly being erected.
These posts are slabs of cedar, aver-
aging over thirty feet in height. On
many of them are plates of copper,
on each of w^hich is an object des-
cribed to us as like an Indian basket
or an inverted bee-hive, under which
is a perfect ~\ (tau) hollowed or
ground in the plate. These plates,
some of which appear to be very old,
are beaten out of lumps of virgin
copper with stone hammers. After being reduced tothe
proper shape and thickness the cross is hammered in.
The plates vary in size from about eighteen inches to
two feet high and the cross occupies the lower half.
Among the carvings, together with certain peculiar
symbols, are female faces, symbol of the sun, whom
the Indians considered feminine, birds and beasts, ani-
mals with men coming out of their mouths, and alliga-
tors or crocodiles, probably the latter, as the immigra-
tions must have been across Behrincr's Straits, south-
Tammuz. 28 1
ward, and they must have brought the traditions of
the crocodile with them.
When the notice of these plates appeared in the
papers eight years ago we wrote to a gentleman in Vic-
toria, asking him to endeavor to buy one for us. His
reply was that the Hydah Indians valued them as we
value heir-looms and he had never heard of any being
sold. Soon after the king (or chief) of the Gold Coast
Hydahs, having heard of his inquiries offered to sell
him one, but demanded no less than five hundred dol-
lars, showing clearly that he regarded them with a
superstitious awe, but for that sum he would probably
have run the risk of throwing in the bones of his ances-
tors also.
We procured a photograph* of the Hydah cross
and as it appears surprising that the Callernish temple
and the New Grange cairn have been so long over-
looked we give cuts of the three. It will be per-
ceived that some of the stones have fallen from
their places.
<3o«coo O ^OOOOC
O «
ft
ii
Of the cairn, Professor Stokes says it covers two
acres, and is perhaps the most remarkable Celtic
*Photographed by Mrs. R. Maynard, corner Douglas and Johnson
Sts., Victoria, B.C.
282 Tamimiz.
monument now existing, but' practically unknown to
Irishmen, although within a two hours' drive from
Dublin.
Strange to say the Professor does not mention its
being in the form of a cross, and in styling it " the
most remarkable," he seems to have forgotten the
temple of Callernish which is more than three times
its length.
The modern name is very English, but is not this
*' Grange " a corruption of Gran or Grian, for the Sun-
god was worshipped in Ireland by that name as well
as in Britain .'*
To return to the Hydah copper X [taic) plates. We
stated that our informant described the object as
representing an Indian basket or an inverted bee-hive.
Can it be possible, however, that these Indians have
preserved yet another Bacchic symbol .''
Can this be the cista mystica (mystic chest) of the
Bacchic rites,* for a wicker basket of early fruit and
seed corn was sometimes substituted for the sacred
box.
If so it is only another discovery. While writing
this we turned to Squier's Peru, and by chance
noticed the following, where in speaking of the attack
of the Spaniards, he says, "the banner of the Incas
with its iris blazon," but not a word more with refer-
ence to this bearing. At the three ends of the Pal-
enque cross, moreover, are lilies. What then does this
tend to prove .''
Under Easter we showed that the iris or fleur-de-
lis*|* or Easter Lily, as some moderns call it, was
sacred to Isis, the great goddess of the Egyptians and,
*Calmet. Taylor's Fragments, IV. p. 45.
tAnciently often represented in the shape of what is called in heraldry
the heraldic tleur-de-lis.
Taminuz. 283
here we find it the sacred emblem of the Incas — not
singly and alone, but in a land where representations
of the sun-serpent and Tau, Maltese and four-limbed
crosses abound, where they still make fires to Cannes,
on his day, and where they anciently had sacred grain,
which was sown in the gardens of the temples of the
sun, and of the convents of the virgins,* some grains
of which were scattered among the stores in the public
granaries as sacred things which would augment and
preserve from corruption the food of the people, and
it was believed that every Indian who had in his
store-house a single grain of this maize could never
lack bread in his life-time.
Did the sorcerers or medicine men of the north
hold such a tradition handed down to them, with the
T (tau), from the land of their origin ? Bacchus, as
Dagon, was sometimes called the Corn -giver; in
Rome, Ceres was the goddess of corn, and in Britain,
Ceredwin, and the British Druids were celebrated in
their mystic poems as " bearers of the ears of corn."
In Mexico they had a corn-goddess called Centeotl, to
whom, according to some writers, children were offered
in sacrifice.
Is it then too much to suppose, as the Hydah
Indians preserved the mystic "j" itmt), that they also
preserved the Bacchic basket for seed corn ?
The Peruvians, or their ancestors, in all probability
(it is safe to say undoubtedly), adopted the lily when,
or before they commenced their wanderings when
placing themselves under the tutelage of Isis Myri-
onyma by whatever name she was know to them, and
in like m.anner, perhaps three or four thousands of years
after, when coats of arms were introduced, the French
adopted the lily when placing themselves under the
*They had virgins similar to the Roman Vestal Virgins.
284 Taniiiuiz — TJirce Hours Agony.
guardianship of the Virgin Mary, who succeeded Isis
in the Roman Church. When others chose warhke
devices, as the Hon and unicorn of England, the Hon
of Scotland, eagles, etc , the French adopted golden
lilies on a blue shield, that bein^ the color sacred in
the R. C. Church to the blessed Virgin, and even took
two angels as supporters !
It was a strange idea to bring angels into a battle-
field, and a strange religion to be called Christian.
We have already shown that in their carousals (or
Feasts as they are called in the P. B.) they drank the
healths of the Saviour and the saints, and that the
Emperor Constantine, who professed to have seen the
luminous cross in the sky in the year 312, murdered
his son and wife, and was only baptized when on his
death-bed in 337, twenty-five years after. This seems
to have been halting between two opinions. It was
not uncommon in later days, in baptism to hold the
right hand up out of the font in which they were
dipped, that it might remain uncJwistened, and so give
a more deadly blow in battle — and of course this was
allowed by the clergy, or at least they could not
prevent it. (See Cale^idar^ Cross and Paganism).
Three Hours' Agony. Some such office as this
for Good Friday is supposed to have existed as early
as the 8th century, but if so it must have lain dormant
for nearly a thousand years, as the present Romish
service, called the Teneh'ce is a novelty even in Rome,
having been invented by a Jesuit named Alfonso
Messia, who composed it in Spanish for his own
Church in Lima, Peru. It soon became popular in
South America and was introduced into Rome about a
century ago.
Accompanied by addresses and sensational music
bearing upon the solemn theme, thirteen candles are
TJiree Hours Agony — Transnbstantiation. 285
placed upon a tnang;ular candlestick and extinguished
one by one, the last only excepted, and this theatrical
mummery is intended to signify that the disciples left
their Master, one by one, and the candle left alight is to
represent the Lord Jesus coming from the tomb ! As
is the case with other R. C. offices there is some con-
fusion. One account says 14 candles and other 15,
one of which is extinguished after every psalm. The
last however being held back behind the " altar " and
then brought forth to typify Christ's resurrection ! ! !
And yet although St. Peter told us to offer up
" spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus
Christ," this solemn mockery, invented by a Jesuit, is
gradually creeping into our Church.
Transubstantiation, Dr. Hook, in his Church
Dictionary, says (in 1864), that this is "The pretended
miraculous conversion or change of the bread and wine
into the very body and blood of our Lord, which the
Romanists suppose to be wrought by the consecration
of the priest. This false doctrine is condemned by the
Church of England in her 28th Article
* Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of
bread and wine), in the Supper of the Lord cannot be
proved by Holy Writ ; but it is repugnant to the plain
words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacra-
ment, and hath given occasion to many superstitions."
It was first broached about the 8th century, but was
not made an article of the faith by the Roman Church
till the Council of the Lateran, A.D. 12 15.
To this very day the Popes themselves do not be-
lieve in it, for they have never since the days of Cre-
dence Tables been willing to prove the sincerity of
their profession by the test of the poisoned elements.
As before stated the conversion of the elements is
supposed to be wrought by the consecratiorir
2 86 Transubstaiitiatioii.
Our Saviour, however, did not consecrate, and the
word it in ItaHcs, after blessed, in Matthew, is an error
which is corrected in the Revised Version. Our Lord
did not bless the bread, but He did what the Jews
still do at their Passover Service. He blessed, t. e.,
He blessed GOD for these and all His Mercies, or gave
thanks, as it is correctly rendered in Mark, Luke, and
Corinthians.
And yet Wheatly says, '' our Saviour Himself did
not deliver this bread and wine until he had conse-
crated them by blessing them and giving thanks''
These Italics are his, and the only authority, the Rev.
Vicar of Brent, has for this statement is this one
doubtful "2V" which is printed in Italics in the Bible,
to show that this word is not in the original !
When it is remembered that Bancroft altered in to
at (see Bowing in tJie Creed) to suit his own purpose
one cannot help questioning by whose instigation this
important it was inserted, especially when other
Protestants did not make such an error.
In the French N. T. we read '' et apres qtiil eut
rendn graces, il le ro7fipit^' (and when He had given
thanks He broke it), in the German, " dankte und
bracJi es" (returned thanks and brake it), Dutch, '' e7i
gezegend hebbende, brak hij het'' (and having blessed,
or given the benediction, he brake it) and in the
Italian, '' e fatta la benedizione, lo rnppel' which is the
same as the Dutch.
Our Consecration prayer is not called by that name
in the Revised and R. E. Prayer-Books, and the
marginal rubrics which were added in Charles the
Second's P. B. are omitted, for there was no provision
in the Second Book of Edward for placing the hand
on the paten and chalice.
As we have already shown, in the Revised P. B. the
minister is to stand, as in our rubric, with his side to
i>
Transiibstantiation — Triangle. 287
the people, but in other books behind the table and
facing the people, and this last is no novelty for it was
the custom in Spain before the eleventh century.
When the so-called priest stands with his back to
the people, thus hiding the elements, he is making
it appear as a mystery, but when as in the above
named churches, and some of our own, he stands with
his face to the people, with the elements before him
there is then no concealment nor mystery.
In the Canadian R. E. books, the rubric, " When
the priest standing before the Table," etc., is entirely
expunged. Instead thereof is, "Then the Minister,
still kneeling in the same place, shall say." The
rubric, "If any of the Bread and W^ine remain," which
was intended to prevent any of the elements being
reserved, is expunged, not being necessary as they
have not been consecrated. (See Communion^ East-
ward Position, Real Presence and Wafers).
Tpiangle. In the external and public worship of
the Pagans the indefinitely multiplied deities were often
grouped in Triads or series of three, as in the often oc-
curring instance of Osiris, Isis and Horus, who in the
opinion of Lenormant and Chevallier, represented to
the people an image of the mystery of divine genera-
tion, a family comprising, like a human family, a
father, mother and son, and Professor Sayce agrees
with them. Other writers conceive they may have
been a reminiscence of the three sons of Noah.
Rawlinson says, " The doctrine of the Trinity,
scarcely apprehended with any distinctness by the
ancient Jews, does not appear to have been one of
those which primeval revelations made known through-
out the heathen world. It is a fanciful mysticism
which finds a trinity in Eicton, Cneph, and Phtha of
the Egyptians, the Oromasdes, Mithras and Arima-
288 Triamrh.
cb'
nius of the Persians and the Monos, Logos and Psyche
of the Pythagoreans and Plato. There are abundant
Triads in ancient mythology, but no real Trinity."
From these Triads arose the symbol of the equilateral
triangle. The Babylonians used it. It was one of
the symbols of Bacchus. The bull Apis worshipped
by the Egyptians was required to be black with a
white triangle on his forehead. In India it is a sym-
bol of the Hindu god Siva. The double triangle with
the circle of the sun in the centre is common on the
ancient monuments of Central America. The Ma-
hommedans consider the double triangle a sacred
emblem and call it the Seal of Solomon. In Russia
most of the churches contain pictures of the Creator,
who is generally represented as an aged man, having
the triangle either in His hand or over His head.
Even the Jews, who consider that since the fall of
Babylon they have rejected all idolatrous worship,
have, it is said, a superstitious regard for the triangle,
and it may be seen in front of some of their syna-
gogues — and is it not too often to be found ifi Protes-
tant dinrcJies, in carvings, in painted windows and in
Christmas decorations, as a symbol of that GOD who
solemnly forbade all similitudes for the use of
religion ?
" To whom then will ye liken GOD ? or zvJiat like-
ness will ye compare unto Him ? "
Besides the triangle there were other emblems of
the triads. The Druids esteemed the mistletoe as
most sacred because not only its berries, but its leaves
also grow in clusters of three united to one stalk.
They also revered the white^ clover leaf or three-
leaved clover, and there were other similar symbols.
Le Page Renouf says however, " No special import-
ance was attached by the Egyptians to the number
three, and it is a mistake to look for Triads everyr
Triangle. 2^9
where, for the number of gods varied according to the
place ; the number nine was much more frequent, and
this is often nothing more than a round number, sig-
nifying either the gods of a locality or the entire
Pantheon."
These nine were called Enneads, and were probably
derived from the ancient belief in Nine* heavens, nine
w^orlds and nine under worlds. According to Brinton's
Myths of the Nezv World this was a sacred number
among the ancient races of America, who had their
Nine Lords of the Night, Nine Heavens, the Wind of
Nine Caverns, the Wind of Nine Serpents and a Styx
called the Nine Rivers.
There is a striking similarity between the Classic
and the American rivers of the dead, for while the
Styx encompassed the lower regions nine times in its
winding course, the latter is called Nine Rivers. The
first was guarded by a dog (generally called three-
headed) and the deceased was furnished with a piece
of money to pay toll for crossing the river, while the
second was guarded by a dog or dragon, and instead
of money the dead was provided with a piece of paper,
for they manufactured a thick coarse paper, and one
would almost suppose they had a kind of paper cur-
rency, or could this paper have been similar to the
passport which the Greek Church place in the dead
man's hand?*
The water of the Styx was poisonous, and if any of
the gods was guilty of perjury, part of his punishment
was to drink a vase of this water which put him to
sleep for one year, after which he was separated for
nine whole years from the society of the gods.
In Scotland the Beltane cakes were always made
with nine square knobs upon them. Pennant, writing
*Page 184.
19
290 Trinity Sunday — Vestments.
in 1 77 1, of the Beltane fires (see Candles^ says "every
one takes a cake of oatmeal, upon which is raised nine
square knobs, each dedicated to some particular being,
the supposed preserver of their lambs and herds, or to
some particular animal the real destroyer of them :
each person then turns his face to the fire, breaks off a
knob and flinging it over his shoulders says * This I
give to thee, preserve thou my horses ; this to thee
preserve thou my sheep.' . . ." Undoubtedly the
" particular being " thus addressed was originally some
particular god.
In Scotland sacred fires were formerly made, some-
times by rubbing a piece of dry wood upon another,
sometimes with a wheel, but in the Western Isles it re-
quired nine times nine, or eighty-one married men to
make this fire, nine of whom, by turns, rubbed two
planks together until the fire was produced, and then
all the household fires were lighted from it.
In England, before the Reformation, the Easter
processions marched nine times round the font. An
old poet quoted by Brand says :
*' Nine times about the font they marche, and on the Saintes do call ;
Then still at length they stande, and straight the priest begins
withall.
And thrice the water doth he touche, and crosses thereon make ;
Here bigge and barl^rous wordes he speakes, to make the devill
quake."
Was this another Pagan amalgamation ? Winding
nine times round the water of Baptism even as the
river Styx wound nine times round the lower world ?
If so those who say the Reformation was a mistake
must at least make an exception in this case and
pardon the Reformers for having abolished this pro-
cession.
The superstition about the number nine still lingers
in England, for among numerous " charms " mentioned
Visitation — [ Vafers. 29 1
by Dyer in his Folk-Lorc, the number nine occurs
six times.
Trinity Sunday. This holy day was instituted by
the Church {i.e., Pope Gregory IV.) in 828, and is said
to have been introduced in England by Thomas a
Becket about A.D. 1162, but according to Bingham it
was not generally established in the R. C. Church
before the beginning of the fifteenth century, or only
a century before the Reformation.
It is said to have been established as a solemn pro-
test against Arianism, which however seems doubtful,
as the Arian controversy had subsided two centuries
previous.
Vestments. Fifty years ago our clergy were con-
tent with the surplice and gown, neither did they wear
a distinctive dress in the streets as if they were a
higher caste than the humble laity. They had no
desire then, neither would they have considered it a
compliment, to be mistaken for R. C. priests.
Some years ago we met an old friend, a D.D. and
Canon, (a High Churchman of the old school) and re-
marking to him that one of the English Bishops had
appeared in a peculiar vestment he replied that he did
not like it, and the true dress for the clergyman was
the cassock, "the short cassock such as I wear."
" Ah," was the reply, " when we were boys clergymen
did not wear that costume," and, takmg hold at the
same time of the lappet of his unbuttoned coat, we
added, " Doctor, when did this come in ? " With em-
phasis, but smiling, he answered, " by degrees," and
walked on, and some time after a gentleman wrote in
The Rock that as he was w^aiting at the Windsor rail-
way station he saw four gentlemen from Clewer
292 Wafers.
standing near him. They all wore the Roman collar,*
the limp felt hat and the long, single-breasted frock
coat, and he asked one of the porters if they were R. C.
priests. " No, sir," was the reply, " they ain't Roman
priests, but they be v 
