Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

was the primitive type of the Christian Church, and to this a large portion at least of Christendom by God's blessing may return.

We have on our paper this year a subject which I think is new. Its title is, "Recent Explorations and Discoveries in Bible Lands." These words remind us of the joint inheritance which the Christian and the Jew still possess in the Holy Land. I rejoice to see this subject introduced even in this restricted form. We cannot speak of Bible lands without thinking of them to whom the promised land was given. "Hath God cast away His people? God forbid" (Rom. xi, 1). "Blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in, and so all Israel shall be saved" (Ib. v. 25). Our subject is not one of mere antiquarian research. It looks back a few thousand years, but it looks forward to eternity. It is not enough to trace the footsteps of him to whom the law was given on Mount Sinai, or of Him by whom grace and truth came. Mount Sinai and Mount Sion, Bethlehem and Calvary, Tabor and Gethsemane, all these are monuments of earth and stone on which are written the promises of a God who cannot change. To see these promises afar off, to be persuaded of them, and to embrace them, is as much a duty now as it was when Abraham went out, at God's command, not knowing whither he went. That city where ten sieges stone should be left upon

have fulfilled the prophecy, that not one another, points to the New Jerusalem above, which is the Mother of us all. Even if we should hold our peace, her very stones would cry out and prophesy that "there shall come out of Sion the deliverer, and turn away ungodliness from Jacob" (Rom. xi. 26).

Why is the conversion of the Jews so slow? The answer is not of man, but of God. Of this we are sure, that "the Lord is not slack concerning His promise" (2 Peter iii. 9). But surely there are stumbling-blocks— hindrances which this Congress may help to remove. What is the lesson now taught to the Jews in those sacred places hallowed by the records of the Saviour in whom all Christians alike profess to believe? While a Turkish guard is needed to restrain the strife of Christians at the birthplace of their Lord, will the Jew, with his Isaiah in his hand, believe that we are the worshippers of the Prince of Peace? But we need not go to Palestine for examples. Let us look at home. What beauty is there in Christianity, as distorted in our so-called religious journals, that a Jew should desire it? We need the evidence so powerful in days of old, both with Jew and Gentile-" Behold how these Christians love one another."

Whatever may be said or done elsewhere, may the Church Congress, by its peace and charity and patient search after truth, set forth before all men a living evidence of the Gospel of Peace.

Now, as to that other proof which is required for the conversion of the Jews, that the fulness of the Gentiles should come in, is not our backwardness in the cause of Missions a negative stumbling-block both to Jew and Gentile ? This is a subject to which this Congress has never been indifferent. We must return to it again and again. It stands on our paper under the head of Missions and Missionary Bishoprics. We have an ample scope. Our field is the world. We do not meet to congratulate one another upon the conversion of a few thousands here and there; but to ask ourselves the question, Why are there so many hundreds of millions still unconverted? Must we not fear that it is mainly owing to the inadequacy of our contributions, to the littleness of our faith, to our backwardness in prayer, to our keeping back our best men, to our too great readiness to give way to difficulties? Thus it is that the evidence fails. We have received a commandment which is feebly obeyed, and a promise which is coldly claimed; and therefore the Gentile world is in no haste to receive the Gospel which we preach, nor to believe that the true God is indeed with us.

I must briefly speak of the other subjects which bear upon the same central work of restoring unity to a divided Church. Revival movements; the employment of special preachers; religious and devotional books; woman's work; Church work in the army and navy, among the boatmen in our canals, and the seamen in our ports, among the blind and deaf and dumb; destitute children; pastoral work of every kind; religious education; lay agency; the supply of clergy-all these are the signs of a Church which knows and feels that God would have all men to be saved, and which is taught by the Holy Ghost to understand the spirit of her Master's thanksgiving-"Of them which Thou gavest Me I have lost none" (John xviii. 9).

To what end do all these signs point? Is it too much to say that this Congress, and those that have gone before, have traced out the path by which we may press on in simple faith and singleness of eye towards the attainment of all that God has promised—all for which the Lord died and rose again—all for which the Holy Ghost came down from heaven? I cannot doubt that the Anglican Church is the true centre round which may be rallied in God's own time all the scattered forces of those who agree in accepting Holy Scripture as their standard of faith, and the Creeds of the undivided Church as their summary of doctrine; stretching out her arms to the great English-speaking race now widely scattered round the earth-welcoming to her communion the Old Catholic, the Greek, the Russian, the Lutheran, the Scandinavian the Wesleyanbearing with any errors she may discern in other branches of the Church, as she hopes her own may be forgiven-agreeing with them in well-de

fined statements of necessary and fundamental truth-commending herself to Jew and Gentile by her visible unity—she may press on to the development of a catholicity as wide and as complete as is possible to be attained, until Rome, awaking from her dream of universal empire, shall be content to be, what she was at Nice and at Ephesus, one among many living stones, built up into one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief Corner-stone.

THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND AND THE CHURCHES IN COMMUNION WITH HER: HOW THEY MAY BE DRAWN MORE CLOSELY TOGETHER.

PAPER.

The RIGHT REV. the BISHOP of EDINBURGH.

It is impossible not to feel that the question of the more intimate union of the Church of England and the churches in communion with her is one of such gravity, involving such important issues, that no small responsibility lies on any one who undertakes to discuss it. It is obvious that any method suggested ought to be applicable to the whole Anglican Communion, and therefore to dwell on relations of the Church of England with any particular Churches might only lead us away from the general principles on which the question must be solved. Again, it is a widely different question from that which is sometimes substituted for it, how certain Churches may be kept from diverging from the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England. Those indeed who love the Church of England most truly will feel that, though she has much to give, she has not a little to receive; that if she has much to teach, she has also much to learn. But, besides this, the union of Churches to be real must be, not dead coherence, but the living organic union of living bodies, acting and reacting reciprocally one upon another. To be the source of strength it must be spiritual fellowship, which means quickened vitality and enlarged apprehension of the manifold truth of God. The end proposed is really nothing else than the fulfilment, in part, of the Redeemer's prayer, that those that believe in Him should be one. And, therefore, if we would arrive at any substantial and permanent basis of union for the Churches of (what is known as) the Anglican Communion, it would be a serious mistake to look to some idiosyncrasies of the Church of England, or to any of those things which every particular Church has "authority to ordain, change, and abolish,"* as an expedient for drawing them together more closely, for we might be promoting a partial and temporary unity to the injury of that which is truly Catholic. surely if our Blessed Lord and His Apostles have taught us-and they certainly have taught us-how those that believe on Him should be one, and how unity should be promoted and manifested, it will be our wisdom simply to adhere to these principles, and follow as closely as

* Art. XXXIV.-" Of the Traditions of the Church."

But

possible the method they indicate. I trust, therefore, that the vast importance of the question, and the danger of drifting away into unprofitable theories, will be my excuse, even if, in calling attention to the teaching of Holy Scripture on the subject, I seem to be repeating truths with which Churchmen must be supposed to be familiar.

[ocr errors]

The unity which our Lord desires of those that believe in Him is, you will remember, twofold. He prayed that they might be one, as the Father and the Son are one-that is, in the unity of one Spirit; and yet so that the world, which cannot discern that which is spiritual and invisible, might be convinced of His divine mission by their unity—that is, that they might be visibly and manifestly one. The unity therefore consists, as is fully expounded in Apostolic writings, in "one body," with its confession of the one faith, its visible seals of fellowship, and its subordination of offices; and, on the other hand, in the members of that one body keeping "the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." And for this there is required not only a spirit of mutual forbearance, humility, and charity, but also that cultivated and matured knowledge which will preserve us from that which is the prolific. source of divisions, from supposing one aspect or fragment of the truth to be the whole wisdom of God. And for the building up of the body of Christ * unto this "unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God," the offices of the ministry are instituted and endowed with spiritual gifts. But, further, the teaching of the New Testament is very definite and explicit as to the special method not only for maintaining, but also for manifesting, unity. Our Divine Master Himself has given † express directions as to the process through which dissensions should be ended; and although He takes, as His manner was, a dispute between two persons as a typical instance to illustrate general principles, yet these principles, as the context implies, are applicable to all occasions of offence. He teaches that when all has been done, through personal intercourse, that charity and equity demand, the case must then be referred to the Church-to the Christian society as a body corporate-and the disputant who shall refuse to accept the decision of the Church on the question at issue can no longer be treatedas a brother. He confirms this (you will remember), and indicates that it is applicable to all questions that touch the welfare of His Church, by a solemn assurance of the validity of Church action, and by expounding the true and original causes of its force-namely, the power of united prayer and the presence of the Divine Head of the Church in its assemblies. The conditions and the limitations of Church action might be inferred from our Lord's own language. But there is one conspicuous instance in Apostolic times of the application of these principles, which supplies sufficient guidance for all ages. When the "burning question" of the relation of the Gentile converts to the law of Moses threatened to divide the Church, how was unity maintained? Why was it not sufficient for St Paul, in the full power of the Spirit of truth, to assert that Christian liberty which he has expounded in his writings? Because to preserve unity more is required than mere teaching. One aspect of truth indeed, though a Paul expound it, is not sufficient for that catholicity of truth without which Catholic unity cannot be sustained. There must be open conference, there must

* Ephes. iv. 12-16.

+ St. Matthew xviii. 15-20.

*

be united counsels, the arguments of the Judaizers must be fully heard, and, finally, there must be concurrence in harmonious action. And the result is, that while the truth which St Paul teaches is more distinctly affirmed than before, yet practical rules are determined by common consent, in order that causes of offence may not arise, and that the unity of the Church, notwithstanding some external diversities, may be not only maintained, but also manifested. These canons of discipline of the first and typal synod of the Christian Church were undoubtedly binding, in accordance with our Lord's teaching, for the purpose of preserving unity; yet that they were not,regarded as universal laws, or infallible dogmas, is evident from St Paul's subsequent instructions on the same subject to the Corinthians. But this general conclusion is obviously to be drawn—that whatever difficult and exciting questions may disturb or threaten the peace of the Church, the method ordained for preventing and healing breaches of unity is through decisions of the Church, following mutual conference, free discussion, patient and tolerant consideration of the arguments of all concerned. And such judgments, being determined by general consent, through the Spirit of Christ enabling those who seek His guidance to discern the common truth in which their differences are harmonised, have the authority of the Divine Head of the Church for the purpose contemplated in them—that is, the maintenance and the manifestation of unity. Some of us have learnt by happy experience how greatly God blesses Church action when thus used; how noisy disputes are hushed and shamed into silence, and the way is made clear as the day, when common counsels have terminated in harmonious action. And of the power of mutual conference, when directed by the spirit of wisdom, patience, and charity, to discover the path of unity even when it seemed hopelessly lost for ages, the late conference at Bonn has supplied an instance, from which all who seek the peace of Jerusalem may well take courage. At all events, if the method for cherishing and preserving unity, which our Lord and His Apostles have taught us, should fail of success through the want of a right spirit in those who adopt it, it is vain to try any other. Whenever other methods have been used, whether in past ages or modern times, by Bishops of Rome or by English Sovereigns and Parliaments-methods in which the spirit of law has been substitnted for that of the gospel, and the bare authority of office, or perhaps of secular power, for the authority of the Spirit of love and truth-a constrained and unreal uniformity may have been produced for a time, but the divisions created have been far more serious than any which seemed to be healed.

To apply these general principles to the question before us, it is only necessary to observe that the same reasons as determine that differences among Christians should be concluded through the action of the Church of which they are members, also indicate that the union of different Churches should be maintained through the Church action of the larger corporate society which includes them all. Particular Churches are sometimes apt, like single individuals, to be one-sided and narrow-minded, and their decisions need to be corrected and harmonised by those of the whole body of which they form a part. That is, in ecclesiastical language, the synod of a diocese should be subordinate to that of the province; the synod of the

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »