« ZurückWeiter »
brances are there; but the flood of radiance seems to be poured upon the marble pavement, and to stream along it to the very door.... Softly and noiselessly is the curtain raised which covers the door, and passed uplifted from hand to hand in silent courtesy as a succession of visitors enter in. Before and around them are scattered, without order or arrangement, persons singly or in groups—in the first open space, upon the same bare stone floor princess and peasant, priest and layman, all equal in the immeasurable distance between them and the eternal object of their adoration." Oddly enough, two or three weeks ago, we found ourselves in the immediate neighbourhood of the Cardinal's Church at Moorfields, and thought we would look in. On approaching the door, we had no chance of raising the curtain, for an official came promptly forward, not to usher us in, but with a wooden bowl full of red and white counters, and very civilly informed us that there was no admission by that door without payment. We did not stop to inquire to what privileges the red or white counters respectively admitted, but made our way to the free entrance, where we found an ingenious arrangement adopted apparently from the neighbouring cattle market. Pens at the furthermost end of the church were erected separating men from women, and most effectually screening the rich from the chance of the poor coming between "the wind and their nobility." All, it was true, were "on the same bare stone floor;" and the poor man, no doubt, was as near "in spirit and in truth" as the rich was to " Him who dwelleth not in temples made with hands;" but he was much further from his Priest, and but very little of the radiance of the tabernacle lamp could have fallen upon him as he gazed wistfully at it through a barrier, which might fairly, we think, be termed "an incumbrance." We have, of course, no right, nor have we the slightest wish, to complain of arrangements made in Romish places of worship; but the contrast between the Cardinal's romantic picture and our own recent experience was ludicrous in the extreme.
In a footnote, page 13, the author fairly warns his readers that he quotes from the Romish version of the New Testament; he says there is no important difference in the passages he quotes between the English version and his; we think there is, and that the fact should be borne in mind if any one cares to be at the trouble of reading a very delusive book full of idle and inconsequential utterances, for we cannot dignify them with the name of argument or reasoning.
Invocation of Saints and Angels. Compiled from Greek, English, and Latin Sources; for the tise of Members of tlve Church of England. Edited by the Rev. Orby Shipley, M.A. Longmans. 1869.
In the Dedication of tbia book, which we do not scruple to denounce in the strongest terms, to the "Citizens of the Church Triumphant," Mr. Shipley thus addresses them: "Secure as to yourselves, ye are yet anxious for us." "We lay no claim to that insight into the knowledge and capabilities of the "Saints" which is involved in the Romish system of Invocation. So far, however, as their cognizance of things on earth may extend, we think that, as regards the volume which lies before us, and other publications of which Mr. Shipley is the Editor, the anxiety to which he refers is not without sufficient foundation. We are in doubt whether to assign the palm to the ignorance or to the impiety which this book betrays. It is quite possible that in "that system of doctrines" (we presume Mr. Shipley means his own) "of which the Invocation of Saints and Angels forms an integral portion," the number of Archangels may be neither greater nor less than three, but (independently of the absence of all Scriptural authority, to which, indeed, it would be unreasonable to expect that Mr. Shipley should appeal) we think that he would experience considerable difficulty in establishing his position by reference either to earlier or later Jewish Tradition, or even to that corrupt system of Romish Invocation, of the nature of which the "Hours of Sarum" affords a fair illustration. Whilst apparently conscious, however, of the abuse of even the shadow of Scriptural authority for that system of which the doctrine of Invocation of Saints and Angels is an integral portion, Mr. Shipley appears to claim on its behalf an Apostolic or at least a sub-Apostolic origin in a passage which we shall present to our readers in his own words :—" It is" (he writes in p. 35 of the preface) "a remarkable fact, that whilst many articles of the Apostles' Creed, in the course of ages, and from the spread of heresy, were made longer, less general, and more definite, the Article which briefly defines the doctrine on which Invocation is based, remains unaltered—' I believe in the Communion of Saints.'"
That Mr. Shipley should interpret this Articlo of the Creed in accordance with his own system, is a fact which can occasion no surprise to those who are acquainted with the tactics of the school with which he has chosen to identify himself. It is a somewhat significant illustration, however, of the prevailing standard of theological attainment in that school, that Mr. Shipley should write either in assumed, or, as we are charitably disposed to believe, in real ignorance of the fact that the words in question formed no part of the Aquileian Creed expounded by Ruffinus, that "they were not mentioned by him as being either in the Oriental or the Roman Creed," that they are "not in the old Latin Creed in the Oxford Library . . . not in the old Greek Creeds," in a word, as briefly summed up by Bishop Pearson, from whose learned notes we have already borrowed, that they are "of a later date." Our readers will probably be prepared, after this specimen of Mr. Shipley's patristic lore, to estimate at its true value his appeal to "the teaching of the Primitive Church," and to "the practice of the Early Fathers." (See Preface, p. 35.) That " the mystery of iniquity" which had begun to "work" in Apostolic times, was, at a comparatively early period, manifested in a superstitious reverence for real or imaginary saints and martyrs, and in a profane invocation of angels, we do not for a moment deny. But that " from the beginning it was not so," the following quotations from writers whose theological attainments were of a somewhat different order from those of Mr. Shipley, may suffice to show.
Bishop Bull, in his valuable Treatise on the Corruptions of the Church of Rome, having first observed that "for the worship and invocation of saints deceased there is no ground or foundation in the Holy Scriptures,"—nay more, that it is "by evident consequence forbidden in the prohibition of the worship and invocation of angels,"—proceeds to support his statement by an appeal to the judgment of antiquity which he sums up in these words—"Indeed, against the invocation of Angels and Saints, we have the concurrent testimonies of all the Catholic Fathers of the first three centuries at least."
Archbishop Usher, in like manner, in his "Answer to a Jesuit's Challenge," speaking of prayer to Saints as a "new worship," which "fetches its original neither from the Scriptures of the Old nor of the New Testament," inquires very pertinently how, "if any such novel tradition as this were at first delivered unto the Church by Christ and His Apostles .... it should come to pass that, for the space of three hundred and sixty years together after the birth of our Saviour, we can find mention nowhere of any such thing?"
We do not plead guilty to the charge of having wasted time and labour by wading through the heterogeneous mass of Con
Vol. 68.—No. 380. 4M
ferences, Litanies, Devotions, and Hymns, which Mr. Shipley has strung together, much less do we design to pollute our pages by extracts from them. Had our space allowed, we would gladly have contrasted with Mr. Shipley's appeal to Catholic custom, in defence of the "direct" and "indirect" forms of Invocation, some of those striking passages adduced by Archbishop Usher from the writings of Theophylact and of Chrysostom, in which they urge upon their readers or hearers the consideration that " God would be petitioned unto by us that are guilty, in our own cause, rather than by others for us;" and remind them that when Peter and James came to our Lord for the woman of Canaan, "He did not yield, but when she herself did remain, He presently gave that which was desired." But we have already, we trust, said enough to expose the true character of Mr. Shipley's compilation. We will only add a recommendation to the Editor, ere he again parades the confession that he would "prefer to be wrong with the goodly company of the Fathers of the fourth and following early ages of the Church, than to be right with the Protestant Reformers of the sixteenth century," to adopt some better methods than those to which he appears to have had recourse in the present instance, to make sure of his premises before he proclaims to the world his conclusions.
To the Editor of the Christian Observer.
Sir,—I have received a MS. paper from my excellent friend, the Rev. E. Biley of Nice, on the very difficult subject with which I have headed this letter, of Armageddon. The paper is probably too long, and in an elaborate form otherwise perhaps not quite suited, for your Periodical. But it contains suggestions alike original and interesting; and which, I incline to think, point to the true solution of the difficulty. The more intelligent, therefore, of your readers (at least such as take an interest in prophetic subjects) will probably be thankful to see a brief abstract of it. Accordingly, though I have not received my friend's authorisation for so doing,—and cannot indeed obtain it without much delay, as he is abroad, I know not where,—I will take the responsibility on myself, and send an abstract; very much, however, in brief.
It will be remembered that the word Armageddon, or, as it is variously written in other editions of the Greek original, Armagedon, or Harmageddon, occurs in verse 16 of chap. xvi. of the Apocalypse; where events are told of as destined to occur incipiently under the Sixth Vial, and to have completion, it would seem, under the Seventh and last Vial. Under the Sixth it had been declared by the revealing Angel, that, contemporarily with the drying up of the waters of the Euphrates, there should go forth three deluding spirits from out of the mouths of the Dragon, the Beast, and the False Prophet, the result of which would be "the gathering together of the kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to the war (iroXenov) of that great day of God Almighty." This drying up of the waters of the Euphrates, Mr. Biley agrees with me in understanding to mean the gradual drying up of the Turkish and Mahometan power; and also, in agreement with me, that the three deluding spirits which were to go forth are the spirits of Infidelity, Popery, and Priestcraft:— the fulfilment of both which predictions, so understood, during the last thirty years, has been notorious. Then next comes verse 15, with its solemn warning, and intimation of the imminent nearness, at the time intended, of Christ's coming: "Behold I come as a thief; blessed is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame;" and then verse 16, containing the word in question: "And they (the three deluding spirits apparently) gathered them together (i.e. the kings of the earth) to the place which is called in the Hebrew tongue, Armageddon.'"
Evidently what is designated in verse 14 as "the war of the great day of God Almighty," is by verse 16 locally connected with the place Armageddon there spoken of. And thus the said final war, the result of which is described in what follows under the Seventh Vial, has long been called the War of Armageddon.
But what the meaning of that word, which is evidently meant to be one of real significance?
It is of course a compound word; compounded apparently of Ar and Mageddo, or (with one d) Magedo; the Hebrew words answering to which may be somewhat variously represented. Thus, as regards Ar, the Greek or English vowel a might be supposed to answer either to the Hebrew K, !"!, or y. Now, taking X, no possible sense to suit will be found to attach to "IN. On the other hand, with n as the prefix, we have the Hebrew word "TH signifying a
mountain. And accordingly, by perhaps most Apocalyptic commentators of repute, e.g. Vitringa and Grotius, this view of it has been adopted. And, in explanation of the other part of the word, referring to the verb TO (gadad) which signifies either to gather or
to destroy, the one, Grotius, supposes Armageddon to mean the mountain of gathering; the other, Vitringa, the mountain of destruction.
But against this Mr. Biley objects, that the Hebrew word for mountain is generally "I^H (Hor) with the ^ and the aspirate; and the ap is never used as its equivalent in the Septuagint. Moreover, so explained, Armageddon becomes a word of quite indefinite local signification; seeing that any mountain may be a mountain of