Read Ebook: Rites and Ritual: A Plea for Apostolic Doctrine and Worship by Freeman Philip Phillpotts Henry Contributor

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 123 lines and 32571 words, and 3 pages

Now it is a question at least worth asking, whether we have not here indications of a greater disposition than we have commonly given our people credit for, to be moved by such things--by sacred song--by fair vestments--by processional movement--by festal decoration? whether we have not been foregoing hitherto, to our great loss, certain effective ways of influencing our people for good? whether there must not, after all, be less truth than has been commonly supposed in the received maxim, that Englishmen care nothing about these things, nor can be brought to care for them; that they have not in them, in short, the faculty of being affected by externals in religious matters; that the sober Saxon spirit loves, above all things, a simple and unadorned worship, and the like? The writer is not ashamed to confess that he has in time past shared in this estimate of his countrymen; but that experience has greatly shaken his confidence in the correctness of it. And he may, therefore, be accepted, perhaps, as a somewhat unprejudiced witness, when he testifies to so much as has come under his own notice as to the effect of the "ritual developments," so to call them, of which he has above spoken. He can bear witness, then, that with these accompaniments, the Services of the Sanctuary have become to many, manifestly, a pleasure and a delight; that these influences are found to touch and move, even to tears, those harder and more rugged natures which are accessible to scarce anything else; breaking even through the crust of formality or indifference which grows so commonly over the heart of middle age. Is it irreverent to think and believe that what these simple souls witness to, as their own experience in presence of a kind of ritual new to them, though familiar of old to their fathers, and to the Church throughout the world, is but an anticipation of what our great poet, Puritan though he was, has described as among the consolations of the blessed? That which our poor peasants gratefully find provided for them on the Church's days of festival, is no other, in its degree, than what, to the poet's thought, awaited his Lycidas "in the blest kingdoms meek of joy and love:"--

It will be understood that the writer is not now engaged in advocating these particular practices as binding upon us, or even as capable of being introduced everywhere; but only pointing out that, in the acceptance and welcome with which this whole side of ritual action has been received, even in unlikely quarters, we have some indication of the probable effect on the general mind of other well-considered ritual restorations.

The bearing of what has now been said upon the restoration of the vestments and the like, is this. The most obvious objection to it is, that the rubric in question has been in abeyance for long years, or even centuries; and that this proves that it does not suit the genius of the English nation. I have shown, indeed, that, as appears from the history of the period in question,--and other evidence might be adduced,--the rubric has not been altogether dormant in times past. Still, the case for desuetude is a very strong one, no doubt; and there is but one thing that could possibly invalidate it, and that is, the existence of unmistakable indications that the revival would, notwithstanding the long abeyance of the rubric, meet some rising need or aspiration of the hour. If it does that, then the negative argument, that there is no place or call for the restoration,--that it is the mere galvanization of a dead thing, or, at best, the summoning of it back to a life which must be fugitive and evanescent, because there is not atmosphere for it to breathe,--is at once done away with.

See Palmer's 'Origines Liturgicae,' vol. ii., Appendix; the 'Directorium Anglicanum;' Lee 'On Eucharistic Vestments;' and the Rev. Jas. Skinner's 'Plea for the Ritual' : but especially the last-named writer's most able dissertations in the 'Guardian' of Jan. 17 and Jan. 24, 1866; and the Dean of Westminster's speech in Convocation, Feb. 9, 1866.

See Neale, Introduction to 'History of Eastern Church,' vol. i. p. 308.

"In all prayers, even in those recited at home preparatory to the public Office, the Epitrachelion is worn."--Neale, 'Eastern Church,' p. 313. And St. Dunstan's Canons, A.D. 979, order "That no priest ever come within the church door, or into his stall, without a stole."--Hook's 'Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury,' vol. i. p. 488.

Hist. Eccl. iii., 31: ?? ??????? ?????? ?? ??????? ?????????.

'De Haeresi,' 78. The very ancient Clementine Liturgy has "exchanging his vestment for a gorgeous one;" ?????? ?????? ????????.

??????, ????????, ??????.

Neale, 'Eastern Church,' Introd., p. 313.

Ibid., p. 307.

Letter to the 'Guardian,' Jan. 24, 1866.

Of the cope it is needless to say more than that it is properly processional, though recognised in the English Church for celebration, and for the clergy in the choir on high festivals.

It may be added that the English vestments differ sufficiently from those of foreign Churches to have a national character.

It thus appears that the Eucharistic vestments, and even our ordinary ones through them, are a link of a marvellously interesting kind between us and antiquity, even Apostolic antiquity; and between us and the whole Christian world. Nay, our vestments, like our Services, connect us with the old Mosaic Ordinances. They ought to be grave reasons indeed, which should induce us to raze them from our statute-book, whatever became of the question of their restoration to general use.

Of other usages now under debate, I would mention briefly--1. The position of the celebrant during the office; 2. The two lights on the altar; 3. Incense; 4. The mixed chalice; 5. The crucifix.

The Fathers generally prefer 'Altar,' the Liturgies 'Holy Table.'

See on this subject, in Appendix A, a valuable comment of the Bishop of Exeter on 1 Cor. xi. 24, and St. Luke xxii. 19.

In some cathedrals, as Exeter, and at Westminster Abbey, the remains of the ancient practice are to be seen; the vessels being placed, the offerings of the clergy made, and the Confession said, at the middle of the Table.

Renaudot, Liturgiar. Oriental. Collectio.

Rev. iv. 5. On the symbolism of candles, lit or unlit, see Dr. Jebb's valuable pamphlet 'Ritual Law and Custom' . Notes F. H.

See Dr. Littledale's 'Mixed Chalice,' with reference to its having been discountenanced by the Bishop of Exeter.

See Neale, Gen. Introduction, p. 307.

These vary much with different Churches,--an indication perhaps of the indifference of the rite. They are chiefly,--1. the union in Christ of the Humanity with the Divinity; 2. the pouring forth from His side of Blood and Water. In either sense the act may have been a devout afterthought; and on the whole I think it improbable that our Lord mixed the cup. That the Jews drank their wine mixed is not much to the purpose.

I know by experience, in particular instances, that this danger is by no means imaginary: and I confess to having the deepest conviction of the rashness and folly of attempting to reintroduce, even among sober Englishmen and Englishwomen--especially in connection with the Holy Eucharist--this snare of mediaeval Christendom.

If it be objected that the Cross is open to the same objection, I answer, No. The Cross, as experience proves, while it reminds us of the Death of Christ, does not draw out that warm feeling, which is at once so delightful and so dangerous to some classes of minds. And the same may be said of pictorial or sculptured representations of the entire Crucifixion, where the larger treatment of the subject makes all the difference. It is the concentration of thought and devotion upon the natural resemblance or representation of Christ Himself, that renders the crucifix so dangerous, and infallibly draws on its votaries to a breach of the Second Commandment.

'Directorium Anglicanum,' p. xiv.

See an able article in the 'Contemporary Review,' No. 1, Jan. 1866.

I refer, first, to the fact that she withdrew from her Service-book certain orders previously embodied in it for the performance of some of these actions. Under this head comes the elevation of the Elements after consecration. This is confessedly, even by the admission of Roman writers, a modern ceremony, not older than the twelfth century. However, in the old English Service-books the order was, "After the words, 'For this is my Body,' the priest shall bend himself towards the Host, and afterwards lift it above his forehead, that it may be seen by the people." But in the Communion Office of 1549, this was forbidden by rubric, "These words are to be said without any elevation, or shewing to the people." And the Articles of 1562-1571 confirm this, saying, that "the sacrament was not by Christ's ordinance lifted up or worshipped" . So, again, the sign of the cross was, according to the First Book of Edward, to be used at consecration; but in the Second it was withdrawn. Nor, I believe, can any rehabilitation of these practices be alleged from subsequent injunctions, canons, or customs. It is in vain to say that there was anything accidental in the omission of the cross at consecration, since it was carefully retained at baptism, and defended subsequently in the canons of 1603; or that the "elevation" or lifting up, "and worshipping," was restored by the omission of the prohibition in 1549, since by 1562 it was expressly disallowed. Those who plead, as a support to the rubric, the better mind of the Church, as manifested in the wishes of her great men--her Andreweses and Cosins--and even in her canons of 1603--must accept the fact, that by that better mind and those canons these usages are never advocated.

See Mabillon, Iter. Ital., p. xlix., and 'Principles of Divine Service,' Introd. vol. ii. p. 87. A slight raising of the Elements at the words 'He blessed,' as if making an offering, is ancient and probably universal.

And as regards other ceremonies, while she expects not, nor desires, a rigid uniformity in minor actions, nor has laid down any such code for the observance of her ministers; she will on the one hand seek to realise a higher standard, in point of care and reverence, than has hitherto, perhaps, prevailed among us: but, on the other, she will continue her 300 years' protest against multitudinous and operose ceremonies, as being full surely destructive, in the long run, of the life of devotion.

I have now accomplished, though in a very imperfect manner, my self-imposed task: dwelling, in all humility and anxiety, on our shortcomings and excesses, as well in the matter of Rites and Doctrine, as in that of Ritual.

Is it too much to say that, on view of these things--these vast deflections on the right hand and on the left, in defect and in excess, from Apostolic ways--it would not much grieve or move such an one as I am supposing, whether the "vestment" in which the Service was offered was merely of "fine linen, pure and white," or "a vesture of gold, wrought about with divers colours;" and that all other ritual arrangements, in like manner, would be as nothing in his eyes, in comparison of the truths obscured or imperilled, and of the errors involved, on either hand?

And what therefore I would earnestly desire that the Church of God in this land might draw forth from the present excitement and anxiety about ritual is, a faithful comparison of herself, in point of doctrine and practice, with the Apostolic and Primitive model. There are greater things than these; "The life is more than meat, and the body than raiment." And while we are anxiously discussing whether the life of eucharistic devotion is best fed through the eye or the ear, or how its outward form should be arrayed, it is only too sadly true, that that life and that body are a prey to divers diseases, and need medicine and restoratives, ere they are likely to exhibit much real vigour, nourish and clothe them as we will.

For the second time within our memory, a "vestment" or "ritual" controversy has arisen among us. The last time it was about "the surplice" in preaching, as against the gown; and the "Prayer for the Church Militant," as against the disuse of it. This time it is about the more distinctive eucharistic vestments, as against the surplice; and about a fuller ritual as against a scantier one. Now the last contest was simply a miserable one. I venture to call it so, 1st, because, handled as it was, there was no sort of principle at stake in it, beyond that of assigning to the sermon more nearly its due position and estimate in the rite; and that of adding one more prayer--a touching and valuable one, it is true--to the ordinary Office;--and next, because it utterly misconceived and missed the Church's real mind, in allowing such a thing at all as prayers, or a service at the Altar or Holy Table, when there was to be no Offering and no Communion. To restore the Prayer for the Church Militant, and be content with that, was indeed "to keep the word of promise to her ear, and break it to her hopes." Only as a protest, only as a badge of her rejection--ay, and of CHRIST'S rejection by the world--had she ever condescended to such a Lord's Day Service as that at all.

What was the result and upshot, as might have been expected, of that contest? In the case of some parishes, and almost whole dioceses, successful rebellion against even the letter of the rubric; and in places where the result was different, a contented acquiescence ever since in the victory achieved. Is it not evident that it was not worth achieving? And why? Because all the while the Church's real desire and aim was ignored; she was not one whit nearer to the Apostolic rule, but only proclaimed more distinctly her departure from it.

Oratio dicenda ante Divinum Officium. Portiforium Sarisb.

'Directorium Anglicanum,' p. 17: "It is perfectly unobjectionable to have the sacred vestments of fair white linen, so long as the shape of them be correct."

Leviticus xvi. 4.

Nor in like manner, as has appeared above from the venerable, because primitive and apostolic descent of the eucharistic vestments, can any tinge of superstition or unsound doctrine be properly ascribed to them, unless it be through the fault of any in whose persons they minister to eucharistic doctrines and practices, which were unknown to Apostolic and primitive days.

See the Bishop of Oxford's opinion, delivered in Convocation.

NOTE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

In revising the above pages for a Fourth Edition, I have corrected the statement made by me in page 40, as to the doctrine maintained by Archdeacon Denison; and I desire to repeat here the expression of regret, which I have already made public through another channel, at having misrepresented his view. A correspondence between us, since published by him , will explain more fully the state of the case. It may suffice to repeat here, that the exact position taken up by him in 1856, as regards the points under discussion, is expressed in the two following propositions:

"That The Body and Blood of Christ, being present naturally in Heaven, are, supernaturally and invisibly, but Really, Present in the Lord's Supper, through the elements, by virtue of the act of consecration."

"That worship is due to The Body and Blood of Christ, supernaturally and invisibly, but Really Present in the Lord's Supper, 'under the form of Bread and Wine,' by reason of that Godhead with which they are personally united. But that the elements through which 'The Body and Blood of Christ' are given and received may not be worshipped."

End of the 1st Book of Homilies.

I have to acknowledge many communications on various points; of which I have to some extent availed myself in this edition.

OPINIONS OF THE BISHOP OF EXETER ON CERTAIN POINTS OF DOCTRINE.

Having had occasion to receive from the Bishop of Exeter an expression of his views on the subjects discussed in pp. 31-37, I asked and obtained permission to embody it in an Appendix, as his latest and most matured judgment on the matter to which it relates.

The Bishop says:--"I regard the Grace of the Eucharist as the Communion of the Death and Sufferings of our Lord. St. Paul , in his statement of the Revelation made to him from Christ, sitting at the Right Hand of GOD the Father, seems to me distinctly to affirm this Truth.

"His words ?? ???????? , in their literal and plain signification, show that the Lord's Death is one continuous Fact, which lasts and will last till he comes and lays down His Mediatorial Kingdom, subjecting it, and Himself, its King, to the Father.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet