The Church: Her Books and Her Sacraments Part 4

Each part of the Church has its own Liturgy, differing in detail, language, form; but all teaching the same faith, all based upon the same rule laid down by Gregory for Augustine's guidance.[1] Thus, there is the Liturgy of St. James, the Liturgy of St. John,[2] the Liturgy of St. Mark, and others. A National Church is within her rights when she compiles a Liturgy for National Use, provided that it is in harmony with the basic Liturgies of the Undivided Church. She has {41} as much right to her local "Use," with its rules and ritual, as a local post office has to its own local regulations, provided it does not infringe any universal rule of the General Post Office. For example, a National Church has a perfect right to say in what language her Liturgy shall be used. When the English Prayer Book orders her Liturgy to be said in "the vulgar,"[3] or common, "tongue" of the people, she is not infringing, but exercising a local right which belongs to her as part of the Church Universal. This is what the English Church has done in the English Prayer Book.

It is this Prayer Book that we are now to consider.

We will try to review, or get a bird's-eye view of it as a whole, rather than attempt to go into detail. And, as the best reviewer is the one who lets a book tell its own story, and reads the author's meaning out of it rather than his own theories into it, we will let the book, as far as possible, speak for itself.

Now, in reviewing a book, the reviewer will probably look at three things: the t.i.tle, the preface, the contents.

{42}

(I) THE t.i.tLE.

"_The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the Use of the Church of England._"

Here are three clear statements: (1) it is "The Book of Common Prayer "; (2) it is the local "directory" for the "_Administration_ of the Sacraments of the Church," i.e. of the Universal Church; (3) this directory is called the "Use of the Church of England". Think of each statement in turn.

(1) _It is "The Book of Common Prayer"_.--"Common Prayer"[4] was the name given to public wors.h.i.+p in the middle of the sixteenth century.

The Book of Common Prayer is the volume in which the various services were gathered together for common use. It is many books in one book.

As the Bible is one book made up of sixty-six books, so the Prayer Book is one book made up of six books. These books, revised and abbreviated for English "Use," were:--

{43}

(1) The Pontifical.

(2) The Missal.

(3) The Gospels.

(4) The Gradual.

(5) The Breviary.

(6) The Manual.

Before the invention of printing, these books were written in ma.n.u.script, and were too heavy to carry about bound together in one volume. Each, therefore, was carried by the user separately. Thus, when the Bishop, or _Pontifex_, was ordaining or confirming, he carried with him a separate book containing the offices for Ordination and Confirmation; and, because it contained the offices used by the Bishop, or _Pontiff_, it was called the _Pontifical_. When a priest wished to celebrate the Holy Eucharist, he used a separate book called "The Missal" (from the Latin _Missa_, a Ma.s.s[5]). When, in the Eucharist, the deacon read the Gospel for the day, he read it from a separate book called "The Gospels". When he {44} went in procession to read it, the choir sang scriptural phrases out of a separate book called "The Gradual" (from the Latin _gradus_, a step), because they were sung in _gradibus_, i.e. upon the steps of the pulpit, or rood-loft, from which the Gospel was read. When the clergy said their offices at certain fixed "Hours," they used a separate book called "The Breviary" (from the Latin _brevis_, short), because it contained the brief, or short, writings which const.i.tuted the office, out of which our English Matins and Evensong were practically formed. When services for such as needed Baptism, Matrimony, Unction, Burial, were required, some light book that could easily be carried _in the hand_ was used, and this was called "The Manual" (from the Latin _ma.n.u.s_, a hand).

These six books, written in Latin, were, in 1549, shortened, and, with various alterations, translated into English, bound in one volume, which is called "The Book of Common Prayer".

Alterations, some good and some bad, have from time to time been adopted, and revisions made; but the Prayer Book is now the same in substance as it always has been--a faithful reproduction, in all essentials, of the wors.h.i.+p and {45} teaching of the Undivided Church.

As we all know, a further revision is now contemplated. All agree that it is needed; all would like to amend the Prayer Book in one direction or another; but there is a sharp contention as to whether this is the time for revision, and what line the revision should take. The nature of the last attempted revision, in the reign of William III,[6] will make the liturgical student profoundly grateful that that proposed revision was rejected, and will suggest infinite caution before entrusting a new revision to any but proved experts, and liturgical specialists.[7]

Whatever changes are made, they should, at least, be based on two principles--permanence and progress. The essence of progress is loyalty to the past. Nothing should be touched that is a permanent part of the Ancient Office Books; nothing should be omitted, or added, that is outside the teaching of the Universal Church. For the immediate present, we would ask that the {46} Prayer Book should be left untouched, but that an Appendix, consisting of many unauthorized services now in use, should be "put forth by authority," i.e. by the sanction of the Bishops.

(2) _The Administration of the Sacraments of the Church_.--The Sacraments are the treasures of the whole Church; the way in which they may be "administered" is left to the decision of that part of the Church in which they are administered. Take, once again, the question of language. One part of the Church has as much right to administer the Sacraments in English as another part has to administer them in Latin, or another part in Greek. For instance, the words, "This is My Body" in the English Liturgy are quite as near to the original as "_Hoc est Corpus Meum_" is in the Latin Liturgy. Each Church has a right to make its own regulations for its own people.

So with "rites and ceremonies". Provided the essence of the Sacrament is not touched, the addition or omission of particular rites and ceremonies does not affect the validity of the Sacrament. For, the t.i.tle of the Prayer Book carefully distinguishes between "The Church"

and "The Church of England," "the _Sacraments_" and the "_administration_ of the Sacraments". It is for {47} _administrative purposes_ that there is an English "Use," i.e. an English method of administering the Sacraments of the Universal Church. It is this use which the t.i.tle-page calls:--

(3) _The Use of the Church of England_.--This "Use" may vary at different times, and even in different dioceses. We read of one "Use"

in the Diocese of York; another in the Diocese of Sarum, or Salisbury; another in the Diocese of Hereford; another in the Diocese of Bangor; and so on. Indeed, there were so many different Uses at one time that, for the sake of unity, one Use was subst.i.tuted for many; and that Use, sufficient in all essentials, is found in our "Book of Common Prayer ".

(II) THE PREFACE.

It was written, in 1661, by Bishop Sanderson, and amended by the Upper House of Convocation.

What, we ask, do these preface-writers say about the book to which they gave their _imprimatur_?

First, they state their position. They have no intention whatever of writing a new book. Their aim is to adapt old books to new needs.

{48} Adaptation, not invention, is their aim. Four times in their short Preface they refer us to "the ancient Fathers" as their guides.

Next, they state their object. Two dangers, they tell us, have to be avoided. In compiling a Liturgy from Ancient Sources, one danger will be that of "too much stiffness in _refusing_" new matter--i.e. letting a love of permanence spoil progress: another, and opposite danger, will be "too much easiness in _admitting_" any variation--i.e. letting a love of progress spoil permanence. They will try to avoid both dangers. "It hath been the wisdom of the Church of England to keep the mean between the two extremes," when either extreme runs away from the "faith once delivered to the Saints ".

Another object they had in view was to give a prominent place to Holy Scripture. "So that here," they say, "you have an Order for Prayer, and for the reading of the Holy Scriptures, much agreeable to the mind and purpose of _the old Fathers_."

Next, they deal with the principles which underlie all ritualism. In speaking "of Ceremonies, why some be abolished and some {49} retained,"

they lay it down that, "although the keeping or admitting of a Ceremony, in itself considered, is but a small thing, yet the wilful and contemptuous transgression and breaking of a Common Order and discipline is no small offence before G.o.d". Then, in a golden sentence, they add: "Whereas the minds of men are so diverse that some think it a great matter of conscience to depart from a piece of the least of their ceremonies, they be so addicted to their old customs; and, again, on the other side, some be so new-fangled that they would innovate all things, and so despise the old, that nothing can like them, but that is new: it was thought expedient, not so much to have respect how to please and satisfy either of these parties, as _how to please G.o.d_, and profit them both".

Finally, whilst wis.h.i.+ng to ease men from the oppressive burden of a mult.i.tude of ceremonies, "whereof St. Augustine, in his time, complained," they a.s.sert the right of each Church to make its own ritual-rules (in conformity with the rules of the whole Church), provided that it imposes them on no one else. "And in these our doings we condemn no other nations, nor prescribe anything but to our own people only; for we think it {50} convenient that every country should use such ceremonies as they shall think best."

It is necessary to call attention to all this, because few Church people seem to know anything about the intentions, objects, and principles of the compilers, as stated by themselves in the Prayer Book Preface.

(III) THE CONTENTS.

These a reviewer might briefly deal with under three heads--Doctrine, Discipline, and Devotion.

_Doctrine._

The importance of this cannot be exaggerated. The English Prayer Book is, for the ordinary Churchman, a standard of authority when theological doctors differ. The _Prayer Book_ is the Court of Appeal from the pulpit--just as the Undivided Church is the final Court of Appeal from the Prayer Book. Many a man is honestly puzzled and worried at the charge so frequently levelled at the Church of England, that one preacher flatly contradicts another, and that what is taught as truth in one church is denied as heresy in another. This is, of course, by no {51} means peculiar to the Church of England, but it is none the less a loss to the unity of Christendom.

The whole mischief arises from treating the individual preacher as if he were the Book of Common Prayer. It is to the Prayer Book, not to the Pulpit, that we must go to prove what is taught. For instance, I go into one church, and I hear one preacher deny the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration; I go into another, and I hear the same doctrine taught as the very essence of The Faith. I ask, in despair, what does the Church of England teach? which teacher am I to believe? What is the answer? It is this. I am not bound to believe either teacher, until I have tested his utterances by some authorized book. This book is the Prayer Book. What does the Church of England Prayer Book--not this or that preacher--say is the teaching of the Church of England?

In the case quoted, this is the Prayer Book answer: "Seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that _this child is regenerate_".[8] Here is something clear, crisp, definite. It is the authorized expression of the belief of the Church of England in common with the whole Catholic Church.

{52}

Or, I hear two sermons on conversion. In one, conversion is almost sneered at, or, at least, apologized for; in another, it is taught with all the fervour of a personal experience. What am I to believe? What does the Church of England teach about it? What does the Prayer Book say? Open it at the Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul, or at the third Collect for Good Friday, and you will hear a trumpet which gives no uncertain sound.

Or, I am wondering and worried about Confession and Absolution. What does the Church of England teach about them? One preacher says one thing, one another. But what is the Church of England's authoritative utterance on the subject? Open your Prayer Book, and you will see: you will find that, with the rest of the Christian Church, she provides for both, in public and in private, for the strong, and for the sick.

This, at least, is the view an honest onlooker will take of our position. A common-sense Nonconformist minister, wis.h.i.+ng to teach his people and to get at facts, studies the English Prayer Book. This is his conclusion: "Free Churchmen," he writes, "dissent from much of the teaching of the Book of Common Prayer. In {53} the service of Baptism, expressions are used which naturally lead persons to regard it as a means of salvation. G.o.d is asked to 'sanctify this water to the mystical was.h.i.+ng away of sin'. After Baptism, G.o.d is thanked for having 'regenerated the child with His Holy Spirit'. It is called the 'laver of regeneration,' by which the child, being born in sin, is received into the number of G.o.d's children. In the Catechism, the child is taught to say of Baptism, 'wherein I was made the child of G.o.d'. It is said to be 'generally necessary to salvation,' and the rubric declares that children who are baptized, and die before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved'."[9] What could be a fairer statement of the Prayer-Book teaching? And he goes on: "In the visitation of the sick, if the sick person makes a confession of his sins, and 'if he heartily and humbly desire it,' the Priest is bidden to absolve him. The form of Absolution is '... I absolve thee from all thy sins in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost'. In the Ordination Service, the Bishop confers the power of Absolution upon the Priest." Nothing could be fairer. It is precisely what the Church {54} of England _does_ teach in her authorized formularies which Archbishop Cranmer gathered together from the old Service-books of the ancient Church of England.

The pulpit pa.s.ses: the Prayer Book remains.

_Discipline._

The Prayer Book deals with principles, rather than with details--though details have their place. It is a book of discipline, "as well for the body as the soul". It disciplines the body for the sake of the soul; it disciplines the soul for the sake of the body. Now it tightens, now it relaxes, the human bow. For example, in the _Table of Feasts and Fasts_, it lays down one principle which underlies all bodily and spiritual discipline--the need of training to obtain self-control. The _principle_ laid down is that I am to discipline myself at stated times and seasons, in order that I may not be undisciplined at any times or seasons. I am to rejoice as a duty on certain days, that I may live in the joy of the Redeemed on other days. Feasts and Fasts have a meaning, and I cannot deliberately ignore the Prayer-Book Table without suffering loss.