*

*

*

'Patrem suum et benignissimum hospitem.' Hence also he wrote another letter to the Marquis of Northampton (who was a patron of learning and a professor of religion) in the behalf of Sleidan, who was promised a pension by the King to enable him to write the history of the progress of religion, beginning at Luther." "At this time, therefore, there were at the Archbishop's house (besides Bucer) Alasco, Peter Martyr, Paulus Fagius, Peter Alexander, Bernardine Ochin, Matt. Negelinus (after a minister of Strasburgh) who accompanied Bucer and Fagius into England, and others whose names do not occur. Three of these were soon after preferred to public places of reading in the Universities.”—Strype's Memorials of Archbishop Cranmer. B. ii. ch. xiii. pp. 194,

195.

Having thus advanced, as it is presumed, enough, and more than enough, to rescue the memory of Martin Bucer from the unmerited obloquy which the Oxford writer would endeavour to cast upon it, I will now return to the subject of prayers for the dead. The following extract from Faber's valuable work on "the Difficulties of Romanism," will display the wisdom of our Reformers in excluding from our communion service a relic of ancient superstition, which gradually paved the way for the Popish doctrine of purgatory." In the primitive Church, as I have already had occasion to state, an opinion, built upon an obscure place in the Apocalypse, very early prevailed: that Martyrs and confessors and men eminent for their evangelical piety would rise again from the dead at what was esteemed a first and partial resurrection; while the rest of mankind would not be resuscitated until the general resurrection in the day of final consummation. Hence it became customary to offer prayers for the dead, not that they might be prematurely extricated from an imaginary Purgatory, but that they might participate of the first or particular resurrection instead of waiting for the ultimate or general resurrection.

1. This opinion, which at the best reposes only upon a text of disputed interpretation, the speculative genius of Tertullian could not suffer to rest in its pristine simplicity.

If to participate in the first resurrection, he argued, be a privilege: then, conversely, to wait for the ultimate resurrection must be a punishment. This penal delay, therefore, must be viewed as an expiation of offences committed in the flesh and, accordingly, to such expiation our Lord alluded, when, in the parable, he spake of a person being cast into prison, whence he should not be suffered to depart until he had paid the very last farthing.

Had Tertullian advanced his speculation, merely as a conjecture of his own; it might, UNAUTHORITATIVELY have been suffered to avail as far as it could avail: but, unhappily, he had the daring presumption to claim for it the sanction of the Paraclete. And now let us mark, what, in the progress of time, has gradually followed. The notion of a penal expiation after death, advanced by Tertullian, when he had lapsed into the heresy of fanatical Montanism, as a frequent revelation of the Holy Spirit, has since been stamped, by the no less fanatical infallibility of the Tridentine Fathers, with the seal of indisputable orthodoxy.

2. This idle and enthusiastic phantasy, when once started, even though started by an individual both after his lapse into heresy and upon the very basis of the heresy into which he had lapsed, was not suffered, in the gradual corruption of the once sincere Church, to lie silently dormant.

It is mentioned with grave approbation by Cyril of Jerusalem, who flourished about the middle of the fourth century: though he fairly confesses, that MANY even then denied, that the souls of the departed, whether they quitted this world with sin or without sin, could be at all benefited by the prayer offered up, on their behalf, over what he calls, in the

L

novel fashionable phraseology of the day, the holy and most tremendous sacrifice. He defends and illustrates the heresypropped speculation of Tertullian, which that writer professed to have received from the Paraclete after he had become a Montanist, by the supposed case of a king, who had banished from his presence certain of his rebellious subjects, but who had afterwards been persuaded at the instance of their friends and relatives to remit their punishment.

3. The same notion, though with greater speciality, is advanced by Ambrose, who flourished during the last quarter of the fourth century.

He thinks, that those, whose sins have not been expiated in this life, will experience a purgatorial fire in the course of the time which elapses between the first and the final resurrection: and he adds, that the punishment of some will extend even beyond the final resurrection, if they shall not have completed the entire length of the intermediate period.

Here, with a lamentable misapprehension of the true and only principle of meritorious expiation, we have direct mention of a purgatorial fire, respecting which the two older writers, Tertullian and Cyril, notwithstanding that the former claimed to have received his doctrine from the Paraclete, say nothing distinct and specific.

4. The times of Augustine immediately succeed the times of his master Ambrose and it is not a little remarkable, that, although Ambrose had expressed his sentiments with a considerable degree of positiveness, his pupil Augustine evinces a very odd sort of hesitation respecting the whole matter, which clearly enough indicates, that, in his days, the superstition had not been perfectly digested, though it was gradually acquiring strength and consistency."-Difficulties of Romanism, book ii. chap. v. p. 458—462.

I pass now from the subject of prayers for the dead, to that

of the use of the terms oblation and sacrifice, as applied by these writers to the elements of bread and wine in the Lord's Supper.

"

In Vol. i. No. 38. it is asked,-" Does no one stumble at the word 'oblations' in the prayer for the Church militant? The answer to this question is attended with no difficulty. If the term "oblations" be considered as identified according to Vol. ii. No. 63. p. 7. with the "sacrificial oblations of the eucharistic bread and wine," the true Protestant, who can discern no sanction for such language either in scripture or in the formularies of our Church, would certainly stumble at the word. But, on the other hand, if he takes a more correct view of the acceptation of the term, and regards it as denoting the free-will offerings made to those who minister about holy things, he will find it no stumbling-block. That such is the legitimate meaning of the word in this place is evident from two considerations. In the first place there is a marginal rubric with this direction, viz, “If there be no alms or oblations, then shall the words [of accepting our alms and oblations] be left out unsaid." Now, it is unnecessary to observe that there can be no celebration of the Lord's Supper without the elements of bread and wine; whereas there may be without alms and oblations, or, as the latter are designated in the rubric preceding the prayer for the Church militant, "other devotions of the people." But, in the next place, this construction of the term is placed beyond all doubt by the circumstance, that four of the sentences which the Priest may read at his discretion, while "the Deacons, Churchwardens, or other fit persons appointed for that purpose are receiving the alms for the poor and other devotions of the people, in a decent bason to be provided by the parish for that purpose," have a specific and exclusive reference to the ministers of religion.

If any further evidence be wanting to confirm this view of the rubric, it may be found in the liturgical writings of Dean

Comber. In his remarks on the "Offertory and Sentences," he observes, with reference to those which begin at 1 Cor. ix. 7. that the next care of the Church is to shew who are the objects of our charity, viz., the ministers, in the next five sentences; and, secondly, all, especially the Christian poor." -Comber's Companion to the Temple. P. iii. S. VI. p. 31.

In Vol. ii. No. 63. of the Oxford Tracts, it is said that " on a comparison of the different forms of oblation and consecration, it will be seen that in each of the four original Liturgies, the Eucharist is regarded as a mystery and a sacrifice."

In a fragment which is given in the same No. from the Gallican form, the following expressions occur,-" We, O Lord, observing these thy gifts and precepts, lay upon thine altar the sacrifices of bread and wine, beseeching the deep goodness of thy mercy, that the Holy and Undivided Trinity may sanctify these hosts."

At the conclusion of the Tract the writer observes,-" Such is the view taken of the consecration and oblation of the Eucharist in the four independent Christian Liturgies. It is well worth the consideration of such Protestant bodies as have neglected the ancient forms. * It may perhaps be said, without exaggeration, that next to the Holy Scriptures, they possess the greatest claims upon our veneration and study."

Dr. Trevern, the Popish Bishop of Stratsburgh, was of the same opinion, as appears from the following quotation given by Faber in his Appendix to the "Difficulties of Romanism." Treating of the ancient Liturgies, Dr. Trevern says, "They all speak uniformly, and in expressions the most energetic, of our doctrines. All proclaim with one voice, the altar, the oblation, the unbloody sacrifice of the new covenant, the real presence of the victim, the change of substance, and, in fine, the adoration."

With regard to these Liturgies themselves, there is no