Read Ebook: The Church: Her Books and Her Sacraments by Holmes E E Ernest Edward

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 1030 lines and 63415 words, and 21 pages

Then, again, the Church alone could decide which books were, and which books were not, "the Scriptures". How else could we know? The society authorizes its publications. It affixes its seal only to the books it has issued. So with the Divine Society, the Church. It affixes its seal to the books we now know as the Bible. How do we know, for instance, that St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians are part of the Bible, and that St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians is not part of the Bible? Because, and only because, the Church has so decided. If we had lived in the days of persecution it would have made a considerable difference to us whether this or that sacred book was included in the Christian Scriptures. Thus, when the early Christians were ordered by Diocletian to "bring out their books," and either burn them or die for them, it became a matter of vital importance to know which these books were. Who could tell them this? Only the society which published them, only the Church.

And notice--to say this, is not to disparage the Scriptures because we exalt the Church. It is to put both Church and Scriptures in their true, historical place. We do not disparage a publication because we exalt the society which issues that publication; rather, we honour the one by exalting the other. Thus, when we say that the creeds interpret the Bible, we do not disparage the Bible because we exalt the creeds, any more than we disparage the Church when we say that the Bible proves the creeds. Take the "Virgin Birth," as a single illustration. Are we to believe that our Blessed Lord was "born of the Virgin Mary"? Church and Bible give the same reply. The Church taught it before the Bible recorded it; the Bible recorded it because the Church taught it. For us, as Churchmen, the matter is settled once and for all by the Apostles' Creed. Here we have the official and authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church, as proved by the New Testament; "born of the Virgin Mary".

It is this Bible, the Church's Manual of doctrine and devotion, that we are to think of.

We will think of it under five familiar names:--

The Scriptures. The Bible. The Word of God. Inspiration. Revelation.

THE SCRIPTURES.

This was the earliest name by which the Bible was known--the name by which it was called for the first 1200 years in Church history. It was so named by the Latin Fathers in the fifth century, and it means, of course, "The Writings". These "Scriptures," or "Writings," were not, as the plural form of the word reminds us, one book, but many books, afterwards gathered into one book. They were a library of separate books, called by St. Irenaeus "The Divine Library"--perhaps the best and most descriptive name the Bible ever had. This library consists of sixty-six books, not all written at one period, or for one age, but extending over a period of, at least, 1200 years.

These are the three earliest MS. collections of the Bible as yet discovered--and strange stories, of mystic beauty, and, it may be, of weird persecution, they could tell if only they could speak. Other manuscripts we have--copies of ancient manuscripts; versions of ancient manuscripts; translations of ancient manuscripts; texts of ancient manuscripts. So they come down the ages, till, at last, we reach our own "Revised Version," probably the most accurate and trustworthy version in existence.

"The Scriptures," or "the Writings," then, consist of many books, and in this very fact, they tell their own tale--the tale of diversity in unity. They were written for divers ages, divers intellects, divers nations, in divers languages, by divers authors or compilers. They were not all written for the twentieth century, though they all have a message for the twentieth century; they were not all written for the English people, though they all have a truth for the English people; they were not all written by the same hand, though the same Hand guided all the writers. In, and through the Scriptures, "God, at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets"; and in, and through them, He "hath in these last days, spoken unto us by His Son".

Time passes, and these sixty-six books, written at different periods, in different styles, in different dialects, are gathered together in one book, called "The Book," or The Bible.

THE BIBLE.

Here, then, are sixty-six volumes bound together in one volume. This, too, tells its own tale. If "The Scriptures," or scattered writings, speak of diversity in unity, "The Bible," or collected writings, tells of unity in diversity. Each separate book has its own most sacred message, while one central, unifying thought dominates all--the Incarnate Son of God. The Old Testament writings foretell His coming ; the New Testament writings proclaim His Advent . Thus, all the books become one book.

Take away that central Figure, and both the background of the Old Testament and the foreground of the New become dull, sunless, colourless. Reinstate that central Figure, and book after book, roll after roll, volume after volume, becomes bright, sunny, intelligible.

This it is which separates the Bible from every other book; this it is which makes it the worthiest of all books for reverent, prayerful criticism; this it is which makes its words nuggets of gold, "dearer unto me than thousands of gold and silver"; this it is which gives the Bible its third name:--

THE WORD OF GOD.

In what sense is the Bible the Word of God? Almost any answer must hurt some, and almost every answer must disappoint others. For a time, the "old school" and the "new school" must bear with each other, neither counting itself "to have apprehended," but each pressing forward to attain results.

In speaking of the Bible, we commonly meet with two extreme classes: on the one hand, there are those who hold that every syllable is the Word of God, and therefore outside all criticism; on the other hand, there are those who hold that the Bible is no more the "Word of God" than any other book, and may, therefore, be handled and criticized just like any other book. In between these two extremes, there is another class, which holds that the Bible is the Word of God, and that just because it is the Word of God, it is--above all other books--an "open Bible," a book open for sacred study, devout debate, reverent criticism.

INSPIRATION.

What do we mean by the word? The Church has nowhere defined it, and we are not tied to any one interpretation; but the Bible itself suggests a possible meaning.

It is the Word of God heard through the voice of man.

Thus, as Dr. Sanday puts it, the Bible is, at once, both human and Divine; not less Divine because thoroughly human, and not less human because essentially Divine. We need not necessarily parcel it out and say such and such things are human and such and such things are Divine, though there are instances in which we may do this, and the Scriptures would justify us in so doing. There will be much in Holy Scripture which is at once very human and very Divine. The two aspects are not incompatible with each other; rather, they are intimately united. Look at them in one light, and you will see the one; look at them in another light, and you will see the other. But the substance of that which gives these different impressions is one and the same.

It is from no irreverence, but because of the over-towering importance of the book, that the best scholars have given the best of their lives to the study of its text, its history, its writers, its contents.

Their criticism has, as we know, been classified under three heads:--

This living substance, entrusted to living men, is the revelation of God to man, and leads us to our last selected name--Revelation.

REVELATION.

Lastly, the Bible is the revelation of a future state. Things begun here will be completed there. As such, it gives man a hope on which to build a belief, and a belief on which to found a hope.

We must believe, For still we hope That, in a world of larger scope, What here is faithfully begun Will be completed, not undone.

Our next selected book will be the Church of England Prayer Book.

The Council of Toulouse, 1229, and the Council of Trent, 1545-63.

St. Luke x. 26,

Heb. i. 1, 2.

St. John v. 39.

St. John i. 14.

The University Presses offer ?1 1s. for every such hitherto undiscovered inaccuracy brought to their notice.

This is the Church's description of Inspiration in the Nicene Creed: "Who spake by the Prophets".

Gal. i. 15, 16.

THE CHURCH'S BOOKS.

THE PRAYER BOOK.

We now come to the second of the Church's books selected for discussion--the Prayer Book.

The English Prayer Book is the local presentment of the Church's Liturgies for the English people.

Each part of the Church has its own Liturgy, differing in detail, language, form; but all teaching the same faith, all based upon the same rule laid down by Gregory for Augustine's guidance. Thus, there is the Liturgy of St. James, the Liturgy of St. John, 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 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," or common, "tongue" of the people, she is not infringing, but exercising a local right which belongs to her as part of the Church Universal. This is what the English Church has done in the English Prayer Book.

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

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

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

THE TITLE.

The Pontifical. The Missal. The Gospels. The Gradual. The Breviary. The Manual.

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".

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 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.

THE PREFACE.

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

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

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet